BF2S Forums Attitude check time!

Spark wrote:

I think we need to all become a tad more open-minded.

Not naming any names, but many have become very... aggressive... towards alternative views.

I hear ya man. Coincidentally that thread brought out intelligent replies

Spark wrote:

because people jumped to conclusions before thinking about what he said, and started flaming.[/b]

Do explain

It seemed to me he was looking for attention. There are better ways to get your point across with out going to extremes to try to offend people. Would a post like that be appropriate to start an intellectual conversation on that subject?

Kmarion wrote:

It seemed to me he was looking for attention. There are better ways to get your point across with out going to extremes to try to offend people. Would a post like that be appropriate to start an intellectual conversation on that subject?

Why would he want attention, though? He doesn't seem the attention-seeking type. There are better ways to get your point across (and I wish he'd taken some of these ways), sure. But the point was there to see, and some saw it (fancy saw it immediately, and I suspected it). If you're familiar with his posts you should know he sometimes uses extreme sarcasm to get his point across.

Spark wrote:

Why would he want attention, though?

Why else would he try to offend so many people? He knew the reaction he would get. He used very poor judgment. Bub is not a newcomer to these forums.

Yeah, sarcasm is great when people laugh. But when you're being an asshole, it just isn't. I lost family both on 9/11 (And they weren't military personnel as Boob tried to explain to all of us retards who couldn't wrap our heads around his sideways Aussie logic) and in Iraq. I didn't think his post was funny or thought provoking at all. At best it was completely offensive and unnecessary. It didn't raise a question, and it didn't ask people think about a topic in a different way. Are you gonna be pissed at me for having a different point of view than a 17 year old loser who takes tasteless shots at people with more guts than he'll ever have?

Since I still don't get it, will someone please explain to me what he was REALLY trying to say? I'm sure it was very important, and worth offending some people by trivializing the deaths of their loved ones.





P.S. his ban appears to have been lifted according to voodoo. That's nice. At least a vote and moral sensibility don't apply.

Last edited by Not (2006-12-07 21:11:52)

weamo8 wrote:

dubbs wrote:

weamo8 wrote:

I think Bubbalo is crazy, and i have never agreed with him about anything, but I really surprised when the ban topic was posted.  How do you have a D&ST forum when anyone who has a differing point of view is banned?  Everyone agreeing is boring.

I am going to back Fancy up on this.  There is a line, when you disrepect people that is different then having  different view.  One of the linked post on the ban post, shows that he was just trying to disrepect people.  He placed hijackers from 9/11 on a list to honor the freedom fighters in Iraq.  Other then the 9/11 caused the Iraq war, they have nothing in common.  He should have just titled the thread, lets honor the terrorist of 9/11.

Also, I was the one that started the post, and you can tell that I have taken a lot and seen a lot of abuse/disrespect in the DS&T thread.  I have even had a very good debate with Bubbalo, because he had a different point of view.  I created the ban post because I think that he crossed the line, and it was not a difference a point of view, but disrepect.

This whole thread is proving Bubbalo's point.  That dumbass must be smarter than I gave him credit.

How is that proving your point?  There is a difference between disrespect and having a different view point. 

ATG wrote:

Fancy_Pollux wrote:

weamo8 wrote:

I think Bubbalo is crazy, and i have never agreed with him about anything, but I really surprised when the ban topic was posted.  How do you have a D&ST forum when anyone who has a differing point of view is banned?  Everyone agreeing is boring.

There's a difference between simply having a different point of view and knowingly posting a tasteless thread (on December 7th of all dates) with the sole intent of trolling and starting a flame war. IRONCHEF got himself permabanned for that reason.

And so did Bubbalo.
R.I.P. http://i7.tinypic.com/21ez5ep.jpg

It seems that his ban was lifted by Voodoo.  Voodoo stated that he did not break any rules so the ban was lifted.

Not wrote:

Yeah, sarcasm is great when people laugh. But when you're being an asshole, it just isn't. I lost family both on 9/11 (And they weren't military personnel as Boob tried to explain to all of us retards who couldn't wrap our heads around his sideways Aussie logic) and in Iraq. I didn't think his post was funny or thought provoking at all. At best it was completely offensive and unnecessary. It didn't raise a question, and it didn't ask people think about a topic in a different way. Are you gonna be pissed at me for having a different point of view than a 17 year old loser who takes tasteless shots at people with more guts than he'll ever have?

Since I still don't get it, will someone please explain to me what he was REALLY trying to say? I'm sure it was very important, and worth offending some people by trivializing the deaths of their loved ones.





P.S. his ban appears to have been lifted according to voodoo. That's nice. At least a vote and moral sensibility don't apply.

A few things.

This is a 'tactic' or method that has been used by Bubbalo several times. During a debate, if someone takes great offense to something he says or does, he immediately takes an extreme and deliberately offensive stance to show... well... that the person is basically two-faced. In essence, he is saying 'well, you didn't condone that so why are you condoning this? What makes this different?'

I point to the thread where it was asked where no liberal or 'anti-American' posts. Of course, this was a ridiculous proposition, and Bubbalo responded by creating a thread where he specifically named people who he did not want to partake in the thread. Of course, this drew a highly negative response, which made him show hiis true meaning behind the thread.

This is the same thing - only this was in response to harsh criticism of him criticizing the military. He took an extreme, deliberately offensive position (that he did not believe) in order to expose this criticism as highly prejudiced and irrational. But he took it wayy too far, to the point where his true meaning was near impossible to discern (though fancy got it, kudos to him).

Kmarion wrote:

dubbs wrote:

It seems that his ban was lifted by Voodoo.  Voodoo stated that he did not break any rules so the ban was lifted.

3. Help maintain a fun and friendly atmosphere by using your best judgment and granting people the benefit of the doubt when taking place in discussions.

I don't think any of you used your best judgement NOR gave him the benefit of the doubt.

How is that proving your point?  There is a difference between disrespect and having a different view point.

Bubbalo's point was that a lot of people here are hypocrites.

Spark, just to be honest,  Bubbalo stated that he told people the meaning of the thread, but no where was there a meaning.  He could have easily put do you think other countries list of people to honor because of the Iraq war look like this?  Then posted as he did.  In that post there is nothing about what his purpose was.  That was not the only post he made to day that were not thought through.  There was one about a Christmas Poem.  He posted something along the lines that soldiers potect us from the boogeyman.  He could have made a better case by saying What was the soldier doing standing out in front of the house?  Protecting his family from the boogeyman.  That would have made people more willing to except his point of view.  Tatic only works if you can presaude people to the other side, and not make them not listen to you at all.

dubbs wrote:

Spark wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

3. Help maintain a fun and friendly atmosphere by using your best judgment and granting people the benefit of the doubt when taking place in discussions.

I don't think any of you used your best judgement NOR gave him the benefit of the doubt.

How is that proving your point?  There is a difference between disrespect and having a different view point.

Bubbalo's point was that a lot of people here are hypocrites.

With more thought, he could have made the point a lot better.  The way he did it was disrespectful.  If I was to call your mother a whore (as in the standing on the corner and making money), and just to try to prove a point, it is still disrepectful.  If I was put where I was coming from around that thought, it take on a different meaning.

BTW:  I do not think that about your mom.  I have never met you or your mom, it is just a point.

OMG!!!!!!!!!!!! BAN HIM!!!!!!!!!!!!! j/k

You are correct, of course.

However, remember that the 7th of december thing has absolutely no significance - as it's actually the 8th in Australia and no-one in Australia really remembers that kind of thing.

dubbs wrote:

Spark, just to be honest,  Bubbalo stated that he told people the meaning of the thread, but no where was there a meaning.  He could have easily put do you think other countries list of people to honor because of the Iraq war look like this?  Then posted as he did.  In that post there is nothing about what his purpose was.  That was not the only post he made to day that were not thought through.  There was one about a Christmas Poem.  He posted something along the lines that soldiers potect us from the boogeyman.  He could have made a better case by saying What was the soldier doing standing out in front of the house?  Protecting his family from the boogeyman.  That would have made people more willing to except his point of view.  Tatic only works if you can presaude people to the other side, and not make them not listen to you at all.

I realise that. But the method of delivery does not change the package, yes?