[Streaker]

Careful, Mustang: If you hurt his feelings he'll go crying to a mod to get the thread locked.

[Mustang1]

Streaker wrote:

Careful, Mustang: If you hurt his feelings he'll go crying to a mod to get the thread locked.

No, no, first he cries, then he invents some label (like "stalker"), then he hypocritically chastises you for something he does constantly, then he cries again, then he apes someone's blog, then he runs away or whines about the thread's gone off tangent.

Feel free to correct any mistakes...

[Streaker]

Mustang1 wrote:

Streaker wrote:

Careful, Mustang: If you hurt his feelings he'll go crying to a mod to get the thread locked.

No, no, first he cries, then he invents some label (like "stalker"), then he hypocritically chastises you for something he does constantly, then he cries again, then he apes someone's blog, then he runs away or whines about the thread's gone off tangent.

Feel free to correct any mistakes...

[ridenrain]

I was going to make the comment that it's usually the other side of the fence that turns these into personal attacks, insults or pissing matches but I guess that's obvious too.

Try to stay on the topic, eh?

[Mustang1]

What some here fail to grasp is that studying and applying ideologies to the Canadian context takes more than agreeing with their tribe's each and every move and additionally, condemning the other tribe's each and every step. Many Canadians sit as moderates and many mix ideological tenets as they see fit. In many ways, ideologues are a rarity in Canadian politics, but it's easy, intellectually, to subscribe to the dogmatic approach.

[Mustang1]

ridenrain wrote:

I was going to make the comment that it's usually the other side of the fence that turns these into personal attacks, insults or pissing matches but I guess that's obvious too.

Try to stay on the topic, eh?

And he illustrates my points perfectly! Swift move hypocrite!

Oh...and feel free to comment (if you can) on my last relevant post. I'll wait for you to further prove my assessment.

[DerbyX]

ridenrain wrote:

I was going to make the comment that it's usually the other side of the fence that turns these into personal attacks, insults or pissing matches but I guess that's obvious too.

Try to stay on the topic, eh?

That is on topic. You see while you feel not the least bit guilty for libelling all Liberals with cries of corruption and political blindness and insinute continually that we are all card carrying communists and terrorist sympathizers (Thus demonstrating you have no actual knowledge of any of them) some of us try not to blanket others instead believing specific attacks are more fair.

Under your nonsense you seem to feel its perfectly OK to slur everybody of any particular race, creed, or colour as long as you don't personally insult a member of that group.

That and you cry nonstop about the Liberals and blame them whenever possible in even unrelated threads and think that constitutes genuine political debate.

[Pimpbrewski]

Oh, you mean to say that this forum has Conservative and Liberal discussions.

Crap, I never even noticed that before.

[DerbyX]

I've had some great debates with conservatives on actual issues. Sadly, you rarely get that anymore because hacks like riden troll every political thread with nothing but political partisanship and turn every single debate into a "blame the Liberals" attack.

Look at the Morgentaller-OoC thread. He was the person who somehow blamed the entire affair on Liberals trying to "turn" the public against Harper by dishonestly expecting him to tell the truth about his parties stance.

[Mr_Canada]

Pimpbrewski wrote:

Oh, you mean to say that this forum has Conservative and Liberal discussions.

Crap, I never even noticed that before.

This is how I break CKA users down:

Nobodies - Newbie users, Small Trolls, Spammers

Elitists - People who are the best at debating and pretty much deserve to believe they are better then everyone else. Insults heavily.

Shit-Spewers - Never actually debate, just spew insults and retarded nonfactual garbage.

Intellectuals - Generally smart people who offer their opinion and generally are uncontested because it is usually actual fact.

Defenders - Can defend their side to the death.

Modern CKAer - Not particularly special or anything. Debates occasionally.

Small CKAer - Doesn't comment much. Side comments on threads every so often, never in heated debates.

Haters - People who hate something and speak about it on CKA.

Complainers - People who do nothing but complain about the people who hate.

Mods - Government.

Users can fall into more then just 1 group. And most people will fall into the "Haters" group and the "Complainers" group. Anti-American vs. Anti-Muslims, for example.

I limit Intellectual debate happening between less then a dozen users.

[commanderkai]

bootlegga wrote:

I never said that Ridenrain's topics are more inflammatory than Streaker's. I would agree that both post inflammatory topics. They are each other's foil.

I simply said that Ridenrain posts far more topics than Streaker does. When I said 'trifle' I was talking total number of topics started (the gist of my entire post). Read it again if you don't believe me.

If I could figure out how to find the stats (I've tried several times and still can find out how many each has started), I'd argue RR is in the top 5 of topic starters on this site, if not the top 3. Streaker, on the other hand, might only be in the top 10 or 15.

And my point is, that people can post articles and topics all you want, but if everything you post can be summed up into two massive merged topics...both of which are extremely imflammatory...then MAYBE, just maybe...that comparing Streaker and Riden with topic posting habits is kinda iffy, since it would be difficult knowing who would post more topics if it wasn't the fact that the mods merged the topics

I had to fix the quotes

[Mustang1]

Mr_Canada wrote:

Pimpbrewski wrote:

Oh, you mean to say that this forum has Conservative and Liberal discussions.

Crap, I never even noticed that before.

This is how I break CKA users down:

Nobodies - Newbie users, Small Trolls, Spammers

Elitists - People who are the best at debating and pretty much deserve to believe they are better then everyone else. Insults heavily.

Shit-Spewers - Never actually debate, just spew insults and retarded nonfactual garbage.

Intellectuals - Generally smart people who offer their opinion and generally are uncontested because it is usually actual fact.

Defenders - Can defend their side to the death.

Modern CKAer - Not particularly special or anything. Debates occasionally.

Small CKAer - Doesn't comment much. Side comments on threads every so often, never in heated debates.

Haters - People who hate something and speak about it on CKA.

Complainers - People who do nothing but complain about the people who hate.

Mods - Government.

Users can fall into more then just 1 group. And most people will fall into the "Haters" group and the "Complainers" group. Anti-American vs. Anti-Muslims, for example.

I limit Intellectual debate happening between less then a dozen users.

Not bad...

[Dayseed]

Here's another problem with trying to decide if this forum is more Conservative or Liberal...

Drop the capital letters from conservative or liberal.

Not every thing that happens in this country needs to be observed, weighed, analyzed and expressed in terms of a political party. Want more bus-routes? It can be as simple as: Is there the money, is there the demand and is there a better way to move people? It doesn't need to be a fight about how the NDP wants to steal money out of my pocket, the Conservatives want child labour to run the bus or the Liberals are going to hire their friends to drive the buses.

But that what these things usually degenerate into because sophisticated political analysis can't be learned from reading National Post editorials, cruising random blogs, phoning into talk-shows and belly-aching on the internet. Since that's all some people have, that's all they know how to use.

And jumping fucking Jesus Dharma Initiative Christ, does it show.

[Mustang1]

Dayseed wrote:

But that what these things usually degenerate into because sophisticated political analysis can't be learned from reading National Post editorials, cruising random blogs, phoning into talk-shows and belly-aching on the internet. Since that's all some people have, that's all they know how to use.

Yep, yep and yep! And you'll notice that those individuals have long abandoned (read: run away) this thread. If they can't ape others than they're out of material.

[PluggyRug]

Probably the "far left" people select the "far right" entry as that is what they would perceive. With "Conservative" selecting "Liberal" etc for the same reason, with a varying degree for the other entries.
This would give (as per the current results) a somewhat left leaning CKA.

Just my own (red) right leaning opinion.