Spam

Advanced search

[Terms Of Conduct]

Terms Of Conduct

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

[Celsus]

Well right off hand, I have asked several times what you do for employment and you haven't answered.

Oh, I can't remember that you did ... and it's quite a personal question. I thought you were referring to religious ones.

I'm working with computers and stuff. Is that precise enough? If not then feel free to contact me via private mail.

LOL and the religious points of view of people are not private? 

No. Not an a public debate board about RELIGION. Of course not, lol.

[VG59]

Celsus, You think you know that I don't like you.  This is debate, I am not suppose to agree with you.  If you want a person that agrees with you, why are you here?  Get over it.  You have the world according to Celsus and people are not going to see things the way you see them.  There is no need to accuse people who disagree with you that they are saying these things because they don't like you.  

What are you trying to do?  Reduce my points of view to merely having a personal issue with you?  

Seriously that is weak debate.

And I have answered every question exactly from my point of view, that just doesn't seem to be good enough for you.  You want people to "admit" that you have backed them into a corner of the square box you have constructed.  And guess what?  They don't live in your square box.  

It is called perspective taking.  Step out of your box and sincerely try to see that other people think differently than you do.

Well I better go to work.  I have a load of projects that need grading.

No, I am simply telling you how I feel. And seriously, I don't want or need you to like me. You've got your reasons for your reactions and that's ok.

I would just like to be able to have honest debates.

The feeling of whether you think I like you or not is irrelevant to the debate, so why bring it up? 

It doesn't come across as a reasonable thing to say in a debate.  It comes across as implying that my words to you are not based on logic in the debate but based on emotions of how I feel about you.

Couldn't be further from the truth.  IRL, we would probably get a long well. 

As far as honest debates, I'd suggest you consider that plenty of people might see some of your debate tactics as less than honorable. 

[VG59]

Well right off hand, I have asked several times what you do for employment and you haven't answered.

Oh, I can't remember that you did ... and it's quite a personal question. I thought you were referring to religious ones.

I'm working with computers and stuff. Is that precise enough? If not then feel free to contact me via private mail.

LOL and the religious points of view of people are not private? 

No. Not an a public debate board about RELIGION. Of course not, lol.

But when they choose that some things are private and not debatable with their religion you badger them with shouts of dishonesty, lack of fortitude, running with their tails between their legs and so forth. 

Even on a debate board, if people choose not to respond, they shouldn't be badgered.  They should be respected. 

Now on the work thing, it really doesn't matter what you do.  And if you do not wish to bring this forward, people shouldn't push it. Even if it is relevant to the topic, and sometimes it is. 

People could utilize what you do to destroy your credibility in the community.  That would be wrong, not nice. 

Kind of like when you bring up stuff like, "I know you do not like me."  It is just said to destroy credibility on the point that I was making. It wasn't a very nice thing to do. 

Now to reitterate the point I was making that has NOTHING to do with whether I like or do not like you is that you give your point of view, your world according to you.  There are plenty of people that see things very differently.  And until you attempt to see things from another point of view, no answer will be to your satisfaction.

[wiscidea]

Quick question...

If someone like Celsus starts a thread and asks the same question over and over, is it really badgering or spam... in that particular thread? I mean... anyone reading the thread is there voluntarily. Why not just say... oh there goes that Celsus yammering about the trinity again... and not read the thread?

I'm talking about within a thread started by the person who wishes to keep bringing attention to his original post.

[Celsus]

Well right off hand, I have asked several times what you do for employment and you haven't answered.

Oh, I can't remember that you did ... and it's quite a personal question. I thought you were referring to religious ones.

I'm working with computers and stuff. Is that precise enough? If not then feel free to contact me via private mail.

LOL and the religious points of view of people are not private? 

No. Not an a public debate board about RELIGION. Of course not, lol.

But when they choose that some things are private and not debatable with their religion you badger them with shouts of dishonesty, lack of fortitude, running with their tails between their legs and so forth. 

Even on a debate board, if people choose not to respond, they shouldn't be badgered.  They should be respected. 

Now on the work thing, it really doesn't matter what you do.  And if you do not wish to bring this forward, people shouldn't push it. Even if it is relevant to the topic, and sometimes it is. 

People could utilize what you do to destroy your credibility in the community.  That would be wrong, not nice. 

Kind of like when you bring up stuff like, "I know you do not like me."  It is just said to destroy credibility on the point that I was making. It wasn't a very nice thing to do. 

Now to reitterate the point I was making that has NOTHING to do with whether I like or do not like you is that you give your point of view, your world according to you.  There are plenty of people that see things very differently.  And until you attempt to see things from another point of view, no answer will be to your satisfaction.

They do not want to answer some question because they know what the logical conclusions and consequences of them would be and they do not want to threaten their belief system.

That's it.

[VG59]

And of course what you think sets the standard of what people are thinking too. 

[Celsus]

And of course what you think sets the standard of what people are thinking too. 

If they had an answer then why wouldn't they answer and shut me up?

[Acumen]

And of course what you think sets the standard of what people are thinking too. 

If they had an answer then why wouldn't they answer and shut me up?

Regardless of motive, spamming is against the TOC.  And moderators will decide what qualifies as spamming. 

[Celsus]

And of course what you think sets the standard of what people are thinking too. 

If they had an answer then why wouldn't they answer and shut me up?

Regardless of motive, spamming is against the TOC.  And moderators will decide what qualifies as spamming. 

You got a weird definition as to what spam is then.

[VG59]

And of course what you think sets the standard of what people are thinking too. 

If they had an answer then why wouldn't they answer and shut me up?

They do answer you, they have answered you.  You don't accept their answer.  What you are suggesting is they say what you want them to say to placate you and shut you up.  Celsus, do you wish to be treated like a spoiled child?  Seriously?

[Acumen]

And of course what you think sets the standard of what people are thinking too. 

If they had an answer then why wouldn't they answer and shut me up?

Regardless of motive, spamming is against the TOC.  And moderators will decide what qualifies as spamming. 

You got a weird definition as to what spam is then.

Not really.  Coming from Bnet, you should be very familiar with it. 

[Celsus]

And of course what you think sets the standard of what people are thinking too. 

If they had an answer then why wouldn't they answer and shut me up?

They do answer you, they have answered you.  You don't accept their answer.  What you are suggesting is they say what you want them to say to placate you and shut you up.  Celsus, do you wish to be treated like a spoiled child?  Seriously?

Why should I accept any collection of word as a serious answer to the question I asked?? Why wouldn't I be permitted follow-up questions in order to understand what their 'answer' actually meant and expect these questions to be answered too?

[Celsus]

And of course what you think sets the standard of what people are thinking too. 

If they had an answer then why wouldn't they answer and shut me up?

Regardless of motive, spamming is against the TOC.  And moderators will decide what qualifies as spamming. 

You got a weird definition as to what spam is then.

Not really.  Coming from Bnet, you should be very familiar with it.

By the way: the censoring here is becoming worse than on Bnet it seems ...

[Acumen]

And of course what you think sets the standard of what people are thinking too. 

If they had an answer then why wouldn't they answer and shut me up?

Regardless of motive, spamming is against the TOC.  And moderators will decide what qualifies as spamming. 

You got a weird definition as to what spam is then.

Not really.  Coming from Bnet, you should be very familiar with it.

By the way: the censoring here is becoming worse than on Bnet it seems ...

Censoring isn't always a bad thing, Celsus.  As a poster, I wouldn't hang out on forums that didn't censor posts.

[Celsus]

And of course what you think sets the standard of what people are thinking too. 

If they had an answer then why wouldn't they answer and shut me up?

Regardless of motive, spamming is against the TOC.  And moderators will decide what qualifies as spamming. 

You got a weird definition as to what spam is then.

Not really.  Coming from Bnet, you should be very familiar with it.

By the way: the censoring here is becoming worse than on Bnet it seems ...

Censoring isn't always a bad thing, Celsus.  As a poster, I wouldn't hang out on forums that didn't censor posts.

Depends on WHAT the censorship criteria are ...

• Children's Prayer.... unc... by SteveC [July 30, 2010, 11:08:14 PM]
• Riot against Messianic Je... by SteveC [July 30, 2010, 09:43:30 PM]
• Court Upholds Expulsion o... by SteveC [July 30, 2010, 09:25:51 PM]
• The Kids Are All Right. by SteveC [July 30, 2010, 09:08:19 PM]
• Honduras... here we come!... by SquirleyWurley [July 30, 2010, 06:23:50 PM]
• A thought by Betsy by kwd111 [July 29, 2010, 03:56:49 PM]
• 77'7" Kerrville Cross Rai... by SteveC [July 28, 2010, 01:54:13 PM]
• That Darling of Creationi... by SteveC [July 27, 2010, 05:51:56 PM]
• Segmentation & Evolution by SteveC [July 27, 2010, 10:56:42 AM]
• I must have overslept on ... by SteveC [July 26, 2010, 11:12:09 PM]
• 'Little Brown Balls' Tie ... by charliejohn [July 25, 2010, 07:34:39 PM]
• Whales Descended From Tin... by SteveC [July 25, 2010, 07:23:50 PM]
• South Pacific Plant May B... by SteveC [July 25, 2010, 07:05:31 PM]
• Transitional Species Exis... by SteveC [July 25, 2010, 05:09:41 PM]
• Fundamentalist's Peppered... by SteveC [July 25, 2010, 02:32:03 PM]
• Haeckel and his Embryos by SteveC [July 25, 2010, 10:36:39 AM]
• Flagellum,"poster child" ... by SteveC [July 24, 2010, 11:10:12 PM]
• Evo's Fundamentalist Posi... by Ed.W [July 22, 2010, 10:44:19 AM]

Members

• Total Members: 558
• Latest: Messedumbessy

Stats

• Total Posts: 86510
• Total Topics: 2615
• Online Today: 19
• Online Ever: 135
• (July 09, 2010, 02:08:16 PM)

Users Online

Users: 1
Guests: 20
Total: 21

SteveC