board77

Split off from the Land sale thread, this is a topic I've wanted to discuss anyway, so, have at it... Go for other tactics and methods of arguments too... this one has just been bugging me recently...

I'm not going to derail this topic with this discussion, as you wouldn't mind seeing me do, as then you could call me a hypocrit, which I'm sure you'd love to do.

quoting the song adds nothing to the discussion. It merely says that elements of pop culture agree with yoru point of view. Who CARES!?

If you want to argue that this course of action leads to having no trees, only museums remembering trees, then ARGUE THAT... don't quote some cheesy pop song!

Hal

I just want to be clear on something.

Is there a general rule about not quoting cheesy pop songs or just for me if the point goes against what your point is?

Is there some general rule against asking people to quote pop songs as arguments?

halplm wrote:

the difference is, SF, we're actually still on topic.

Wait and they paved paradise and put up a parking lot is still not on topic.

Hal,
You seem to be going overboard with SF. It looks like a lynching. Espeically since you are not calling out C_G for any of his and his groupies shit.

I'm not pickign on SF.

Well you YOU said it was ok for Meril to do her drive by one line postings, but its not OK for SF to post Joni Mitchell, a good song.

BTW where in the rules that does it say one can not use a pop song in a post?

there are no RULES, and he's welcome to post the song all he wants...

I think it adds nothign to an argument, and when I'm in an argument, I will call out people who use such a tactic.

This has NOTHING to do with meril posting one liners or anyone else posting anything, or any issues with SF and CG arguing all the time.

This is me, not liking people posting pop songs, or articles, or quotes that do not add information to the debate, but simply say "Hey, this person agrees with me, I must be right."

If the song, article, or quote brings up a relevant piece of information, or interesting argument... quote it, sure, but explain why it's relevant, add your own thoughts... don't just say... "Look here... therefore you're wrong"

halplm wrote:

there are no RULES, and he's welcome to post the song all he wants...

I think it adds nothign to an argument, and when I'm in an argument, I will call out people who use such a tactic.

This has NOTHING to do with meril posting one liners or anyone else posting anything, or any issues with SF and CG arguing all the time.

This is me, not liking people posting pop songs, or articles, or quotes that do not add information to the debate, but simply say "Hey, this person agrees with me, I must be right."

If the song, article, or quote brings up a relevant piece of information, or interesting argument... quote it, sure, but explain why it's relevant, add your own thoughts... don't just say... "Look here... therefore you're wrong"

But just yesterday you said that SF questioning Merils one line post asking the exact same thing was wrong. So which is it?

Yes but the song is pertinent to the topic. The song is about covering nature with concrete (you get my drift) and the thread is about getting rid of forest preserves. There is a common denominator between the song and the topic that I think SF was trying to illustrate using a song. It's not the first time time it's happened and it won't be the last.

Hal
one reason I simply used the song was to AVOID the endless shit with Meril and CG over their libertarian program to end all government lands and parks. I did not want to argue that since
1) Meril will not argue anything of substance beyond a cryptic quip and when I push her on it , then I look like some abusive bully
2) you cannot argue with CG since he is never wrong, has never made a mistake, and has never said anything except the gospel truth.

So instead of a Q and A all about the libertarian program to deforest America, I thought it was better just to print the song which was pro-tree and let it be at that .... let the lyrics speak for me.

I really do think that you are hypersensiteve about agressive debate. It seems that you and maye others do not like the messy residue of freedom of speech that sometimes gets in the way of nice neat pleasantries. But that is just my opinion.

questioning it is not wrong... going ON AND ON AND ON about it is wrong...

Drop it, or start another thread. Dragging one thread down becasue you won't let go of a statement they don't even really want to talk about just ruins it for everyone else.

SF, I noticed you kept on pokeing Meril about her thoughts, if you really wanted to know you shoulda just asked her to PM you, I did and I got a speedy response.

But come on hal, SF posted a song and only kept going on and on and on about it because you asked him what the relevance to a stupid pop song was prompting him to go on about it.

Well Hal if you read all the 'gun' thread you might notice who is not dropping it and figure out that its not just SF. In fact he has been rather good about not asking. He posted the Joni Mitchell song and thats it, nothing more, you are the one who kept it going with your calling him on it. His post could have stayed there and been done.

Ara you're dreamy

Hal here is what I do not get

1) Meril uses Hitler and the Nazis as bogeymen in the self defense thread on page 10

2) CG uses a photo of Hitler linking it to Nazi support for gun control on page 11

3) CG has in the past derided me and others for his fallacy of using Hitler as evil ---Ad Hitlerum -

4) I post the source from Wikipedia showing that CG is doing the very thing that he has said in the past is verbotten and loses the argument


then you get mad..

why don't you get mad when He pulls this shit in the first place instead of getting mad at me because I call himn on it and then will not let him get away with a two-faced self serving explaination of why he is never wrong...

if some other people here grew some balls and started standing up to CG, then I would not have to do it so much and you all would like that so much better

Instead... I get PM's from people begging me "please ignore what CG siad" "just let it go" or "you do not have to respond to him" ...

its not in my nature to just lie down ---- so if you do not want me to oppose his shit all the time .. then you do it first and beat me to it.

Well right now I am bitchy, and lucky Hal is catching the brunt of it.

That's not what this thread is about, SF.

I did not get mad at either of you really... I'm just sick of you two goign back and forth over topics not related to the threads. I'm not the only one.

When it's one comment by him, or one response by you, it's not a big deal. It's only when it goes off and becomes somethign that is not relevant to the thread that it becomes an issue.

When I saw the same thing happening in the land thread, I split that discussion off to here, for a new thread, which is on a subject which, entirely coincidentally, I've been wanting to discuss for some time.

I would appreciate it if we could stick to that topic here.

Ara-anna wrote:

Well right now I am bitchy, and lucky Hal is catching the brunt of it.

It's ok, I can take it

This sort of reminds me of grade school:
"He did that!"
"She did that!"
"How come she doesn't get in trouble too?"

Maybe it would be best if everyone just worry about themselves. You can only control yourself and should be the best you can be. If you don't like what some one is doing, give them a suggestion and then drop it. If you receive a criticism, try not to change the subject and place blame on everyone else.

I'm honestly trying to give helpful suggestions and am not aiming this at anyone specifically.

Well the topic is DEBATE STYLE.

That would cover pretty much everything I have said here.

So you are not going to answer my questions.

Why don't you and others call CG out when he first does the crap he does instead of waiting for me to do it and than you do not like the results?