.... I'm at a loss for words for that bottom portion. I've done exactly what you said multiple times, had open discussions about it. Have been grilled about doing exactly what you're pleading with us to do. Again, a loss for words. How about a different tact? How about people start acting like adults and not falling for the bait and instead bringing it up to us in reports, or ignoring it? If the thread is confusing, blame it on the people we have to edit, NOT the people that have to edit it.
For the record, I deleted my own posts as I no longer want to be a participant in this thread and even asked the mods to delete my original post. The article is the one that concluded people who watch fox news are less informed than those that watch no news. I named no names. I am now officially done in this thread and would prefer my OP was deleted but apparently the mods won't do that. I have since taken measures into my own hand
Im at a loss for this post. First, i myself have never advocated for editing. Only if editing is the way then try to find a way its fair. Ive never cared for the editing. I think its a cop out and ive stated so more than once including in the rules thread. So no, you havent done what ive wanted. Though admitedly ive never been clear on it until now. I also dont think decisions are based on my wants. Im one of many here. As far as blaming, did you read the upper portion and what i said, did you read my posts in the rules section? Before you think im blaming mods for anything please read them. Ive stated many times i think you guys do good under the circumstances. Im asking for a modification of the circumstances is all. I totally get why your editing, im simply asking for a better solution, which, in my opinion, i have provided. If you aRe a mod and being impartial about this, i would hope you see some of my points rather than taking it personal. The very post you quote also has me stating the best thing for this place is for posters to hold themselves accountable. I guess you missed that part?
To me that is the stand up thing to do. Regardless if one feels right or Wrong. If mods didn't edit and posters were allowed to edit themselves then we can see who had a heated moment but can be rational vs those who truly troll just to piss off other posters.
I see your points. They have been discussed by the mods. I brought up the disclaimer at the bottom instead of editing. The issue with that S2 is the official forum of the TrailBlazers. Staff from the Blazers keep an eye on this site. If they see those types of insults they could and probably would remove their affiliation with us.
The first part exactly. Most of the OT threads are one side taking a swing at the other. It sucks, but it is the way it is. He called out the people on the right in the forum. Johnny answered back in kind. Several posts were deleted on both sides, no preferrential treatment.
Just for informational purposes - if you can't delete your post because it's the first post in the thread, you can still edit it and remove the content (replace it with ipsum lorem or never mind or whatever you want). barfo
fuck I just logged on and can't believe the whinefest a couple completely mild comments started. Sorry to make the mods work so hard drying peoples tears. This is honestly crazy.
Sometimes it better to just say, "Yes dear" and then go in the garage to the secret beer refrigerator.
The opening line is really odd to me. "leaves you less informed than watching no news," How can a poll be used to determine which TV channel leaves you less or best informed??? Oh well!
It seems pretty straightfoward: they asked people what they watched, and then asked them some questions about current events. The Fox viewers got fewer correct than the non-Fox viewers. barfo
Post of the year! This message should appear frequently on both the Off-Topic board, and the main board! It's a saying which works in all situations, like, "This too shall pass." I've been off the board since Wednesday, so I picked one thread to read, and had my usual luck.
Okay, this will probably piss off some folks around here, but I doubt that Fox News, MSNBC or CNN are the CAUSE of their viewers being relatively poorly informed as compared with NPR. In my opinion, all three of those cable "news outlets" exist primarily to feed the political biases of their chosen demographics. They're far more interested in attracting viewers than they are in imparting information and they troll for those viewers' time by feeding them the slanted current events dialog that they want to hear. Further, by and large, people who are committed to getting their "news" primarily from just one of those networks aren't really interested in learning new information, they just want to feed their own preconceived notions of the world.
You were off the board for a week, and came back and picked ONE thread to read, and it was a thread in the OT section with "Fox News" in the title? That's not bad luck; that's masochism.
I’d say a better analogy is arguing about whether McDonalds, Taco Bell, or Kentucky Fried Chicken customers have the more nutritious diet.
Pick a thread! Any thread! Got one? Now put it back in your hand and don't tell me what it is! It's a King of Hearts, right?
