Shame. Shame. Shame. Shame.

  • Thread starter Thread starter uncgriff
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 65
  • Views: 2K
  • Politics 
Bigs23 said:
That’s not why I use SI.
Click to expand...
Yep. I already don’t care what my SI list has to say - every single one of them has proven immune to fact based debate - ie maga. My user experience is greatly improved by the relative confidence that the posts I see are delivered in good faith. I don’t have to pick out much chaff.

Honestly, for my experience, the most annoying posters are the ones with a clear “I’m a clever contrarian” streak to their identity/persona. I rarely put those on ignore because despite their impulses, they still then to engage with the facts.
 
Last edited:
Peppers49 said:
I think Superrific means well, but you could post that the sky is blue and they would respond with a 10 page essay about why you are totally wrong.
Click to expand...
No I wouldn't. I amplify views of other posters that I think are correct. I also learn from discussion with other posters and have changed my views upon learning those things, sometimes.

But if you say the sky is green, yes, I will explain why you are wrong. I could just say, "you're wrong" and leave it at that, but how does that help anyone? Monty Python's argument sketch is sarcastic for a reason
 
I don't see the need for the ignore feature. My understanding is that things were so brutally tough that Confederate soldiers would pick the undigested corn out of horse manure and eat it to keep from starving. Who knows when there might be a kernel of something worthwhile in their posts? besides, I'm retired, old, bored and stoned. I have time to play with them.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top