17,188 Threads
#21
(04-03-2016, 08:17 AM)Wonky3 Wrote:
(04-03-2016, 08:09 AM)Juniper Wrote:
(04-03-2016, 08:02 AM)Wonky3 Wrote:
(04-02-2016, 08:01 PM)Juniper Wrote:
(04-02-2016, 11:15 AM)tvguy Wrote: You are. This place will never be what you want. It never was.. EVER. And now that only a handful of people post here. Your eternal wish for a utopian fairy tale forum with this moderated tone and "reasonable dialogue"  ever actually happening is next to impossible.

Civil posting and responses will be the life blood of this space, and when (if) that becomes the standard we might attract more who want to interact with us.

How many years will you be saying this before it finally sinks in that it's never going to happen?

It's quite amazing to me that you want some kind of moderation here to stop the "honest to god nut jobs"  " the rabid opinionated posts that are too absurd to warrant responses"

Well ILC got booted for exactly what you are saying. So did Jesus Christ and others I can't remember.So if it didn't work then what makes you think we need moderation now? Or whom do we "moderate"? SF lib? Tornado? OL?

I don't see them stopping anyone from coming here.


Someone said here recently that they no longer wanted to engage in any kind of political exchanges. Really? I think this is a good place to voice those views,

That would be Juniper and me. I really don't understand why more aren't sick to death of discussing politics.
I can already tell you exactly what every person here already thinks. Hell I've been listening to it for close to a decade.

Just for the record, I never said
Then you are doomed to live in the kind of society others choose for you. Like it or not, our lives, to  a large extent, are dictated by political action. Our country was founded because of political differences, and politcs have been the central force in determining the laws and civil attitudes of our lives. 

We are well aware of the extreme views of politcal leaders, past and present. Many "conservative" views would have us believe the individual is all important and there is no need for any social saftey net for those who "fall through the cracks" regardless of thier best efforts. Others, "liberal or progressive" often promote ideas and programs that foster dependance on  government programs without regard to indivual responsibility. 

It's with political dialog that we attempt to wade through the rhetoric of these extremes and find reasonable balance by electing the more moderate and pragmatic leaders who promote the kind of goverment that allows our civil lives to flourish in the capitalist system that has served us well, albeit well regulated and watched over. 

Our lack of attention to politics has given us the likes of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders. We face a national election in which far too many feel there is no real viable good choice. The sad fact is, this is far too often the case. 

Being attentive to politics is important, and reasonable and rational discussion about things political is the life blood of our system. 

Or, we could just pray. Yeah, that outta work. 
Why do you generalize like that  Wonky?  


Quote:Then you are doomed to live in the kind of society others choose for you. Like it or not, our lives, to  a large extent, are dictated by political action
Why do you make conclusions about a person based on the fact that they don't want to discuss politics online?  This one little preference for the forum gives you insight to me personally?    I'm going to correct you right there.  You make presumptions. Period.
Just responding to your comments:  I "no longer want to engage in any kind of political exchanges."   I just find them tedious. I have no interest in them. And really I never did.  I don't think I have the kind of mind that revels in that kind of debate."

And if you don't want to discuss it here, I'm betting your comment , "I don't think I have the kind of mind that revels in that kind of debate." says a lot. 
In that sort of debate, Wonky. Doesn't mean I don't think about it. Doesn't mean I'm not informed about it.  Brushing up on reading comprehension may be in order.


John Locke my ass.
Reply
#22
(04-02-2016, 07:36 PM)Wonky3 Wrote:
(04-02-2016, 11:20 AM)tvguy Wrote:
(04-02-2016, 09:29 AM)Wonky3 Wrote:
(04-02-2016, 09:03 AM)Juniper Wrote:
(04-02-2016, 08:51 AM)Wonky3 Wrote:  

Someone said here recently that they no longer wanted to engage in any kind of political exchanges. Really? I think this is a good place to voice those views, if only we could moderate our tone and attempt to express those views with reasonable dialog and without ugly slander and ignorant expressions of rebuttal. 

But history is, as always, instructive. We've been here before. CLete, I applaud your tone and hope for a "clean well lighted place" to engage with neighbors and friends we find on these pages. It would a real joy to log on here each day and engage in civil and reasonable dialog that informs, stimulates, amuses, (etc) so that we might share the diverse voices that post. 

I confess I'm not optomistic. I hope I'm wrong. 

I don't think that old chestnut about lack of moderation is entirely true. It's an debate that's been bouncing around for years, but I don't think that's the problem.  Going back to the FB argument....the page Wars, is brutal. Just as brutal as this place EVER was, and in spades. Heaps of abuse all day long. Intense trolling and insulting and nastiness. Like having ten PastorClydes on all the time. But it's probably the busiest page in the County. It's the the means that have changed. The way people interact with the internet.  Forums are dying all over.  And most just have their core groups who hang on.
If true (and I have no reason to beleive it's not), what a sad comentary about our society. 
And there is a solution (of sorts) to that "old chestnut" about moderating these pages. We've discussed it before, but never in detail or fully explored. What if we simply stopped replying to those obvious rabid and "off the wall" posts that have no "redeeming value" of any kind?  Pastor Clyde may have been a good example. If we (myslelf included) had simply ignored those rantings he would have at some point tired of shouting into the dark with no response. We contined to engage him and it took criminal actions from him to finally prevent him from souring this space. 

SF Liberal, I have nothing to say to you, and having seen enough of your ranting I will never again respond to anything you post here. 

There. Done and done. 

What if we simply stopped replying to those obvious rabid and "off the wall" posts that have no "redeeming value" of any kind?

What if?? Where have you been all of these years? People used to PLEAD and beg others to ignore trollish posters.. Don't you remember?? People BEGGED, over and over for us to not respond.
It never worked.. so you NOW say "what if we simply stopped"?? Seriously?
Yes, we we KNOW your opinion well! That you don't agree, or won't consider other attitudes and options only makes clear that you see a reality that is your own. Change is always possible, but it takes some considered optimism to promote it. 

Go read some John Locke and return to discuss it. 

"you see a reality that is your own"  Yes I do see a reality. A reality that non stop pleading for people to post the way YOU want is NEVER going to happen.
My God it's a no brainier Laughing

you don't agree, or won't consider other attitudes and options

Baloney I have indeed considered it and I find it preposterous that after all these years of you trying to get people to do what you want you STILL think it might happen.
Reply
#23
(04-03-2016, 08:23 AM)Juniper Wrote:
(04-03-2016, 08:17 AM)Wonky3 Wrote:
(04-03-2016, 08:09 AM)Juniper Wrote:
(04-03-2016, 08:02 AM)Wonky3 Wrote:
(04-02-2016, 08:01 PM)Juniper Wrote: Just for the record, I never said
Then you are doomed to live in the kind of society others choose for you. Like it or not, our lives, to  a large extent, are dictated by political action. Our country was founded because of political differences, and politcs have been the central force in determining the laws and civil attitudes of our lives. 

We are well aware of the extreme views of politcal leaders, past and present. Many "conservative" views would have us believe the individual is all important and there is no need for any social saftey net for those who "fall through the cracks" regardless of thier best efforts. Others, "liberal or progressive" often promote ideas and programs that foster dependance on  government programs without regard to indivual responsibility. 

It's with political dialog that we attempt to wade through the rhetoric of these extremes and find reasonable balance by electing the more moderate and pragmatic leaders who promote the kind of goverment that allows our civil lives to flourish in the capitalist system that has served us well, albeit well regulated and watched over. 

Our lack of attention to politics has given us the likes of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders. We face a national election in which far too many feel there is no real viable good choice. The sad fact is, this is far too often the case. 

Being attentive to politics is important, and reasonable and rational discussion about things political is the life blood of our system. 

Or, we could just pray. Yeah, that outta work. 
Why do you generalize like that  Wonky?  



Quote:Then you are doomed to live in the kind of society others choose for you. Like it or not, our lives, to  a large extent, are dictated by political action
Why do you make conclusions about a person based on the fact that they don't want to discuss politics online?  This one little preference for the forum gives you insight to me personally?    I'm going to correct you right there.  You make presumptions. Period.
Just responding to your comments:  I "no longer want to engage in any kind of political exchanges."   I just find them tedious. I have no interest in them. And really I never did.  I don't think I have the kind of mind that revels in that kind of debate."

And if you don't want to discuss it here, I'm betting your comment , "I don't think I have the kind of mind that revels in that kind of debate." says a lot. 
In that sort of debate, Wonky. Doesn't mean I don't think about it. Doesn't mean I'm not informed about it.  Brushing up on reading comprehension may be in order.


John Locke my ass.

You're doomed Tia Laughing Laughing
Reply
#24
(04-03-2016, 12:55 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(04-03-2016, 08:23 AM)Juniper Wrote:
(04-03-2016, 08:17 AM)Wonky3 Wrote:
(04-03-2016, 08:09 AM)Juniper Wrote:
(04-03-2016, 08:02 AM)Wonky3 Wrote: Then you are doomed to live in the kind of society others choose for you. Like it or not, our lives, to  a large extent, are dictated by political action. Our country was founded because of political differences, and politcs have been the central force in determining the laws and civil attitudes of our lives. 

We are well aware of the extreme views of politcal leaders, past and present. Many "conservative" views would have us believe the individual is all important and there is no need for any social saftey net for those who "fall through the cracks" regardless of thier best efforts. Others, "liberal or progressive" often promote ideas and programs that foster dependance on  government programs without regard to indivual responsibility. 

It's with political dialog that we attempt to wade through the rhetoric of these extremes and find reasonable balance by electing the more moderate and pragmatic leaders who promote the kind of goverment that allows our civil lives to flourish in the capitalist system that has served us well, albeit well regulated and watched over. 

Our lack of attention to politics has given us the likes of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders. We face a national election in which far too many feel there is no real viable good choice. The sad fact is, this is far too often the case. 

Being attentive to politics is important, and reasonable and rational discussion about things political is the life blood of our system. 

Or, we could just pray. Yeah, that outta work. 
Why do you generalize like that  Wonky?  




Quote:Then you are doomed to live in the kind of society others choose for you. Like it or not, our lives, to  a large extent, are dictated by political action
Why do you make conclusions about a person based on the fact that they don't want to discuss politics online?  This one little preference for the forum gives you insight to me personally?    I'm going to correct you right there.  You make presumptions. Period.
Just responding to your comments:  I "no longer want to engage in any kind of political exchanges."   I just find them tedious. I have no interest in them. And really I never did.  I don't think I have the kind of mind that revels in that kind of debate."

And if you don't want to discuss it here, I'm betting your comment , "I don't think I have the kind of mind that revels in that kind of debate." says a lot. 
In that sort of debate, Wonky. Doesn't mean I don't think about it. Doesn't mean I'm not informed about it.  Brushing up on reading comprehension may be in order.


John Locke my ass.

You're doomed Tia Laughing Laughing

Why does it always have to be such a narrow scope of reason?  Makes me CRAZY!!!! 
Reply
#25
(04-03-2016, 01:04 PM)Juniper Wrote:
(04-03-2016, 12:55 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(04-03-2016, 08:23 AM)Juniper Wrote:
(04-03-2016, 08:17 AM)Wonky3 Wrote:
(04-03-2016, 08:09 AM)Juniper Wrote: Why do you generalize like that  Wonky?  




Why do you make conclusions about a person based on the fact that they don't want to discuss politics online?  This one little preference for the forum gives you insight to me personally?    I'm going to correct you right there.  You make presumptions. Period.
Just responding to your comments:  I "no longer want to engage in any kind of political exchanges."   I just find them tedious. I have no interest in them. And really I never did.  I don't think I have the kind of mind that revels in that kind of debate."

And if you don't want to discuss it here, I'm betting your comment , "I don't think I have the kind of mind that revels in that kind of debate." says a lot. 
In that sort of debate, Wonky. Doesn't mean I don't think about it. Doesn't mean I'm not informed about it.  Brushing up on reading comprehension may be in order.


John Locke my ass.

You're doomed Tia Laughing Laughing

Why does it always have to be such a narrow scope of reason?  Makes me CRAZY!!!! 

So, this went well. What have we learned? "John Locke my ass"? 
We all have to start somewhere. 
Or maybe some of us were just born with knowledge and judgement about these kind of things. Not me. I've stuggled a lifetime to try to dig past the obvious and current trends. I'm not sure I've learned a whole lot, but at least I've given it an honest attempt. 

I think it's best I go back into the wind for a time. It was never my intent to stir the pot and cause the kind of hostilty I see here. 

10-4. Again. Perhaps another time. Perhaps not. 
Reply
#26
(04-03-2016, 05:38 PM)Wonky3 Wrote:
(04-03-2016, 01:04 PM)Juniper Wrote:
(04-03-2016, 12:55 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(04-03-2016, 08:23 AM)Juniper Wrote:
(04-03-2016, 08:17 AM)Wonky3 Wrote: Just responding to your comments:  I "no longer want to engage in any kind of political exchanges."   I just find them tedious. I have no interest in them. And really I never did.  I don't think I have the kind of mind that revels in that kind of debate."

And if you don't want to discuss it here, I'm betting your comment , "I don't think I have the kind of mind that revels in that kind of debate." says a lot. 
In that sort of debate, Wonky. Doesn't mean I don't think about it. Doesn't mean I'm not informed about it.  Brushing up on reading comprehension may be in order.


John Locke my ass.

You're doomed Tia Laughing Laughing

Why does it always have to be such a narrow scope of reason?  Makes me CRAZY!!!! 

So, this went well. What have we learned? "John Locke my ass"? 
We all have to start somewhere. 
Or maybe some of us were just born with knowledge and judgement about these kind of things. Not me. I've stuggled a lifetime to try to dig past the obvious and current trends. I'm not sure I've learned a whole lot, but at least I've given it an honest attempt. 

I think it's best I go back into the wind for a time. It was never my intent to stir the pot and cause the kind of hostilty I see here. 

10-4. Again. Perhaps another time. Perhaps not. 

So,  Wonky comes back, insults and lectures people and then scurries away again all the while preaching his holier than thou sermon.  I say I don't want to debate and somehow that means I don't want to learn or gain knowledge.  Yeah, run,  Wonky.
Reply
#27
Yeah, I still like Wonk's input here. I just keep doing what I do and I don't much care what people think. 
Reply
#28
(04-03-2016, 08:15 PM)cletus1 Wrote: Yeah, I still like Wonk's input here. I just keep doing what I do and I don't much care what people think. 

I still like Wonk's input here Me too.
And "All the hostility"? I'm sorry wonk if you thought I was being hostile. I was being upfront and totally honest about what I think. Like I always have friend or foe. And I consider you a friend.


But he did indeed lecture Turniper Laughing  How about that handle?
Reply
#29
(04-03-2016, 08:15 PM)cletus1 Wrote:  I don't much care what people think. 

Words to live by
Reply
#30
Public service announcement..... Wonky left, its time to check your smoke alarm batteries  Wink
Reply
#31
(04-03-2016, 09:20 PM)GPnative Wrote:
(04-03-2016, 08:15 PM)cletus1 Wrote:  I don't much care what people think. 

Words to live by

I used to say that when I was younger, but never meant it. Now I honestly don't care. Peace of mind comes from not caring too much about what comes out of the mouths of everybody else. 
Reply
#32
(04-03-2016, 09:31 PM)cletus1 Wrote:
(04-03-2016, 09:20 PM)GPnative Wrote:
(04-03-2016, 08:15 PM)cletus1 Wrote:  I don't much care what people think. 

Words to live by

I used to say that when I was younger, but never meant it. Now I honestly don't care. Peace of mind comes from not caring too much about what comes out of the mouths of everybody else. 

OR killing them all.
Reply
#33
(04-03-2016, 09:30 PM)GPnative Wrote: Public service announcement..... Wonky left, its time to check your smoke alarm batteries  Wink

Big Grin
Reply
#34
(04-03-2016, 08:15 PM)cletus1 Wrote: Yeah, I still like Wonk's input here. I just keep doing what I do and I don't much care what people think. 

I really like Wonky's input. I want him to stay and input us all to death.
Reply
#35
(04-03-2016, 08:37 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(04-03-2016, 08:15 PM)cletus1 Wrote: Yeah, I still like Wonk's input here. I just keep doing what I do and I don't much care what people think. 

I still like Wonk's input here Me too.
And "All the hostility"? I'm sorry wonk if you thought I was being hostile. I was being upfront and totally honest about what I think. Like I always have friend or foe. And I consider you a friend.


But he did indeed lecture Turniper Laughing  How about that handle?

Hey!!!!! 


I really need to figure out how to get Tia or Tiamat or Tiamotzz back! 



Naaaah.  To  lazy! Laughing Embarrassed
Reply
#36
Jesus, I can hardly stand the news, but watched 2 hours of it anyway. First I let ABC, NBC and CNN frustrate me, then I turned the channel to MSNBC and couldn't stand that either. Right now I'm watching Joe Dirt. It's fits my mood. I love you Joe Dirt! 
Reply
#37
(04-04-2016, 08:27 AM)cletus1 Wrote: Jesus, I can hardly stand the news, but watched 2 hours of it anyway. First I let ABC, NBC and CNN frustrate me, then I turned the channel to MSNBC and couldn't stand that either. Right now I'm watching Joe Dirt. It's fits my mood. I love you Joe Dirt! 

Yikes, 2 hours of the news, are you crazy?  I'd rather watch Ishtar Razz
Reply
#38
(04-03-2016, 08:15 PM)cletus1 Wrote: Yeah, I still like Wonk's input here. I just keep doing what I do and I don't much care what people think. 

[Image: 11408665_10204346861894295_2001875691_n....e=5704AF69]
Reply
#39
(04-04-2016, 08:48 AM)GPnative Wrote:
(04-04-2016, 08:27 AM)cletus1 Wrote: Jesus, I can hardly stand the news, but watched 2 hours of it anyway. First I let ABC, NBC and CNN frustrate me, then I turned the channel to MSNBC and couldn't stand that either. Right now I'm watching Joe Dirt. It's fits my mood. I love you Joe Dirt! 

Yikes, 2 hours of the news, are you crazy?  I'd rather watch Ishtar Razz
[Image: brody.png]
RICHARD BRODY


APRIL 1, 2016
Elaine May Talks About “Ishtar”
BY RICHARD BRODY

She expressed some bitterness at the release and the commercial and critical failure of “Ishtar,” and reserved choice words for the head of Columbia Pictures at the time, David Puttnam (“whom I consider a major putz”). Puttnam had come to the studio with a plan to transform the industry by reining in budgets and salaries; as May said, “We have such respect for the English that, when an Englishman says Hollywood sucks, people listen.” Puttnam didn’t produce the movie; he inherited it from his predecessors when he took over the studio, in 1986, and though he didn’t publicly bad-mouth it he also didn’t publicly promote it (and, in fact, claimed that he hadn’t seen it and had no intention of ever doing so). As Peter Biskind wrote in his biography of Warren Beatty, the movie’s co-star and producer, “Ishtar was being distributed by an unfriendly studio that Beatty suspected was leaking damaging items to the press.” May said last night that her former performing partner and lifelong friend Mike Nichols called Columbia’s handling of the film “one of the only times a major studio committed suicide.”


Note to GP Native: I had to return to post this for you. I don't know how to post the link...I subscribe to The New Yorker and get daily highlilgt emails. This was one. You could (if you wish) log onto to The New Yorker web site and more than likely get the complete article. 

"What goes around comes around" I guess. This movie is now seen by "the critics" as much better than when first released. I think I saw it but actually can't remember...that outta say something about my attention span. 

Whatever...your pointed remark noted anyway.  Smiling
Reply
#40
(04-04-2016, 10:01 AM)Wonky3 Wrote:
(04-04-2016, 08:48 AM)GPnative Wrote:
(04-04-2016, 08:27 AM)cletus1 Wrote: Jesus, I can hardly stand the news, but watched 2 hours of it anyway. First I let ABC, NBC and CNN frustrate me, then I turned the channel to MSNBC and couldn't stand that either. Right now I'm watching Joe Dirt. It's fits my mood. I love you Joe Dirt! 

Yikes, 2 hours of the news, are you crazy?  I'd rather watch Ishtar Razz
[Image: brody.png]
RICHARD BRODY


APRIL 1, 2016
Elaine May Talks About “Ishtar”
BY RICHARD BRODY

She expressed some bitterness at the release and the commercial and critical failure of “Ishtar,” and reserved choice words for the head of Columbia Pictures at the time, David Puttnam (“whom I consider a major putz”). Puttnam had come to the studio with a plan to transform the industry by reining in budgets and salaries; as May said, “We have such respect for the English that, when an Englishman says Hollywood sucks, people listen.” Puttnam didn’t produce the movie; he inherited it from his predecessors when he took over the studio, in 1986, and though he didn’t publicly bad-mouth it he also didn’t publicly promote it (and, in fact, claimed that he hadn’t seen it and had no intention of ever doing so). As Peter Biskind wrote in his biography of Warren Beatty, the movie’s co-star and producer, “Ishtar was being distributed by an unfriendly studio that Beatty suspected was leaking damaging items to the press.” May said last night that her former performing partner and lifelong friend Mike Nichols called Columbia’s handling of the film “one of the only times a major studio committed suicide.”


Note to GP Native: I had to return to post this for you. I don't know how to post the link...I subscribe to The New Yorker and get daily highlilgt emails. This was one. You could (if you wish) log onto to The New Yorker web site and more than likely get the complete article. 

"What goes around comes around" I guess. This movie is now seen by "the critics" as much better than when first released. I think I saw it but actually can't remember...that outta say something about my attention span. 

Whatever...your pointed remark noted anyway.  Smiling

I am pretty sure I have seen it before, but it was a lifetime ago and I really can't remember a thing about it I just know at the time it was dreadful and became the butt of many jokes with its failure at the box office. I suppose it would be worth a view now to see if it has gotten better with age. But, I don't know, a lot of the 80's era movies are just bad, even the ones I thought were great at the time, I rewatch now and they are pretty bad.

But none the less, I'd still watch a 1980's box office failure over any MSM news any day of the week! Big Grin
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)