http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/usa-mostly-conservative ColumbusUnderground.com Messageboard en-US Mon, 20 May 2013 06:01:27 +0000 http://bbpress.org/?v=1.0.2 q http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/search.php http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/usa-mostly-conservative/page/24#post-228648 Thu, 27 Aug 2009 19:06:00 +0000 Walker 228648@http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/ <p>And that just about does it, eh? </p> http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/usa-mostly-conservative/page/24#post-228641 Thu, 27 Aug 2009 17:33:46 +0000 joev 228641@http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/ <blockquote><p><cite>gramarye wrote <a href="http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/usa-mostly-conservative/page/24#post-228636"> &gt;&gt; </a></cite><br /> You're just jealous because your tail is harder for you to chase than teh kittehs'.<br /> Don't fret about it, though. That was biologically determined.</p></blockquote> <p>Think about how bad it makes this guy feel.<br /> <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xnxzqeT466A" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xnxzqeT466A</a> </p> http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/usa-mostly-conservative/page/24#post-228636 Thu, 27 Aug 2009 17:03:33 +0000 gramarye 228636@http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/ <p>You're just jealous because your tail is harder for you to chase than teh kittehs'.</p> <p>Don't fret about it, though. That was biologically determined. </p> http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/usa-mostly-conservative/page/24#post-228621 Thu, 27 Aug 2009 15:33:18 +0000 Bear 228621@http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/ <blockquote><p><cite>gramarye wrote <a href="http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/usa-mostly-conservative/page/24#post-228613"> &gt;&gt; </a></cite></p> <blockquote><p><cite>TaraK wrote <a href="http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/usa-mostly-conservative/page/24#post-228603"> &gt;&gt; </a></cite><br /> <blockquote><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masculism" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masculism</a><br /> If anything don't you think that men are dealt a more unfair hand then women?<br /> </blockquote><br /> <a href="http://www.mensrights.com.au/">Take it all the way. </a><br /> And now ... let's chase our tails ...</p></blockquote> <p>Says the woman with the kitty avatar to misskitty. 8-)</p></blockquote> <p><img src="http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2008/01/funny-pictures-fighting-jerry-springer-cats.jpg"> </p> http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/usa-mostly-conservative/page/24#post-228613 Thu, 27 Aug 2009 15:09:55 +0000 gramarye 228613@http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/ <blockquote><p><cite>TaraK wrote <a href="http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/usa-mostly-conservative/page/24#post-228603"> &gt;&gt; </a></cite><br /> <blockquote><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masculism" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masculism</a><br /> If anything don't you think that men are dealt a more unfair hand then women?<br /> </blockquote><br /> <a href="http://www.mensrights.com.au/">Take it all the way. </a><br /> And now ... let's chase our tails ...</p></blockquote> <p>Says the woman with the kitty avatar to misskitty. 8-) </p> http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/usa-mostly-conservative/page/24#post-228603 Thu, 27 Aug 2009 14:50:21 +0000 TaraK 228603@http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/ <p><blockquote><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masculism" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masculism</a></p> <p>If anything don't you think that men are dealt a more unfair hand then women?<br /> </blockquote></p> <p><a href="http://www.mensrights.com.au/">Take it all the way. </a></p> <p>And now ... let's chase our tails, which would be similarly "productive" (granted that no one is going to call me a ball-cutter or a victim for using that word, because we so like to aggravate others). </p> http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/usa-mostly-conservative/page/24#post-228599 Thu, 27 Aug 2009 14:32:13 +0000 Bear 228599@http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/ <blockquote><p><cite>greenhouse1014 wrote <a href="http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/usa-mostly-conservative/page/24#post-228597"> &gt;&gt; </a></cite><br /> And just what is the true meaning or "productive"?</p> </blockquote> <p>Ideally, in this instance, making the case for people who don't have degrees in women's studies potentially having valid insights on the subject of feminism. (And, conversely, making the case that people who do have degrees in women's studies are, occasionally, full of s**t on the topic.) Just as those without degrees in sociology more generally potentially have valid insights about that subject, etc.</p> <p>Then again, given my stated preference to see the thread die, perhaps I should reverse that position and make the case that only those with Ph.D.s in women's studies should be allowed to post on the topic. I'm sure Walker could set up an algorithm. </p> http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/usa-mostly-conservative/page/24#post-228598 Thu, 27 Aug 2009 14:30:33 +0000 drew 228598@http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/ <blockquote><p><cite>greenhouse1014 wrote <a href="http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/usa-mostly-conservative/page/24#post-228597"> &gt;&gt; </a></cite><br /> And just what is the true meaning or "productive"? </p></blockquote> <p>I assure you its etymology is... *gasp*... sexist. </p> http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/usa-mostly-conservative/page/24#post-228597 Thu, 27 Aug 2009 14:27:36 +0000 greenhouse1014 228597@http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/ <p>And just what is the true meaning or "productive"? </p> http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/usa-mostly-conservative/page/24#post-228595 Thu, 27 Aug 2009 14:24:27 +0000 Bear 228595@http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/ <blockquote><p><cite>Cookie wrote <a href="http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/usa-mostly-conservative/page/24#post-228590"> &gt;&gt; </a></cite><br /> Oh, are we flogging the thread again?</p> </blockquote> <p>Well, I <em>was</em> going to rip her a new one for correcting Kitty's spelling, but she backed down before I had a chance. But I still kind of had a full head of steam worked up, so I figured, what the hell, why not put it into something a little more productive. </p> http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/usa-mostly-conservative/page/24#post-228590 Thu, 27 Aug 2009 14:17:27 +0000 Cookie 228590@http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/ <p>Oh, are we flogging the thread again? </p> http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/usa-mostly-conservative/page/24#post-228587 Thu, 27 Aug 2009 14:13:18 +0000 Bear 228587@http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/ <blockquote><p><cite>TaraK wrote <a href="http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/usa-mostly-conservative/page/24#post-228570"> &gt;&gt; </a></cite><br /> I assume you mean bigger <em>than</em> that.</p> </blockquote> <p>Noted.</p> <blockquote><p><cite>TaraK wrote <a href="http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/usa-mostly-conservative/page/23#post-228540"> &gt;&gt; </a></cite><br /> Nothing says authority like a person generalizing all minorities and all experiences and the entire global population of humanity -- all the while demonstrating no real knowledge of what you're talking about other than references to your own vague reductive conclusions.<br /> For all threads worldwide, let us just state this and see if it holds true as a fact: <strong>People who have read more and researched more will <u>not</u> consider your opinions worth much if it is obvious that you have read/researched/learned little about the same topic other than your own experiences.</strong><br /> I know not to try and argue things that I haven't devoted time to understanding.</p> </blockquote> <p>Not really sure I agree with this. In my experience people who have read the most about a subject will actually evaluate your arguments on their merits, for better or for worse, rather than falling back on the authority owed them due to their own voluminous knowledge. Hence the fallacy of argument from authority.</p> <p>Specialized knowledge is a tricky thing. There's a tradeoff between breadth and depth in many fields that can actually make specialists overlook some insights that are readily available to those less immersed in the subject. Also, while physicists have the luxury of not listening to non-specialists when it comes to the laws of motion or quantum physics, in the social sciences people are the object of study. No matter how many times the old saw that the plural of anecdote is not data is repeated, it is nevertheless the case that the anecdotes that are dismissed by specialists as unscientific and inadmissible, when suitably extracted and stripped of extraneous information (i.e., all too often, solicited in a manner consistent with prior theory), are the intellectual sustenance of the specialist.</p> <p>So it's a little disingenuous to say that there aren't nuggets of truth to be found in the experiences of non-specialists, when specialists thrive on data derived from precisely those experiences. The question is, does the relevant specialist possess <em>enough</em> depth of knowledge to help sort the relevant information from the irrelevant in those experiences and perceptions and details? </p> http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/usa-mostly-conservative/page/24#post-228585 Thu, 27 Aug 2009 14:07:04 +0000 Hael 228585@http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/ <p>TaraK, just joking around with ya. Years from now, in a college course about teh internet message broads*, this thread should be studied as an example of hyperbolic topic derailment and a dash of obsessive/compulsive behavior.</p> <p>*hmmm, maybe I meant to type boards, not broads...maybe. </p> http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/usa-mostly-conservative/page/24#post-228584 Thu, 27 Aug 2009 14:06:44 +0000 misskitty 228584@http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/ <p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masculism" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masculism</a></p> <p>If anything don't you think that men are dealt a more unfair hand then women? </p> http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/usa-mostly-conservative/page/24#post-228577 Thu, 27 Aug 2009 13:52:18 +0000 TaraK 228577@http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/ <p>Taken.</p> <p>Correcting someone's grammar is a cruddy thing to do, unless you really, <em>really</em> can't resist. </p> <p>Sometimes I think <em>Wife Swap</em> is the internet made into a TV show. </p> http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/usa-mostly-conservative/page/24#post-228575 Thu, 27 Aug 2009 13:48:22 +0000 greenhouse1014 228575@http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/ <blockquote><p><cite>Hael wrote <a href="http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/usa-mostly-conservative/page/24#post-228572"> &gt;&gt; </a></cite><br /> Hitler.</p></blockquote> <p>I mean, Tara is kind of the grammar nazi around here. That's not an insult, because you seem cool. I'm just sayin' </p> http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/usa-mostly-conservative/page/24#post-228572 Thu, 27 Aug 2009 13:43:09 +0000 Hael 228572@http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/ <p>Hitler. </p> http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/usa-mostly-conservative/page/24#post-228570 Thu, 27 Aug 2009 13:42:12 +0000 TaraK 228570@http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/ <p>I assume you mean bigger <em>than</em> that. </p> http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/usa-mostly-conservative/page/24#post-228567 Thu, 27 Aug 2009 13:34:51 +0000 misskitty 228567@http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/ <blockquote><p><cite>TaraK wrote <a href="http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/usa-mostly-conservative/page/23#post-228540"> &gt;&gt; </a></cite><br /> Nothing says authority like a person generalizing all minorities and all experiences and the entire global population of humanity -- all the while demonstrating no real knowledge of what you're talking about other than references to your own vague reductive conclusions.<br /> For all threads worldwide, let us just state this and see if it holds true as a fact: <strong>People who have read more and researched more will <u>not</u> consider your opinions worth much if it is obvious that you have read/researched/learned little about the same topic other than your own experiences.</strong><br /> I know not to try and argue things that I haven't devoted time to understanding. I have opinions, but I know that I don't have enough authority to engage on those topics as others. And I wouldn't want to seem stupid, which I would. I know that.<br /> <u>Good Idea/Goal:</u> Try not to seem stupid. If you're going to argue against people and their professional research, you might want to do comparable research. </p></blockquote> <p>nevermind im bigger then that </p> http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/usa-mostly-conservative/page/24#post-228554 Thu, 27 Aug 2009 13:05:00 +0000 TaraK 228554@http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/ <blockquote><p><cite>gramarye wrote <a href="http://www.columbusunderground.com/forums/topic/usa-mostly-conservative/page/23#post-228546"> &gt;&gt; </a></cite><br /> This thread is a zombie horse. It was beaten while it was dead, and now it's back for more.</p></blockquote> <p>Nice.</p> <p>Endless resurrection. I was just thinking there should be a function to block threads. You know, for when we keep clicking despite better wisdom. </p>