0
   

Why is there so much unrest in Georgia?

 
 
Reply Wed 12 Aug, 2009 09:40 am
There is either a war going on or the opposition marches sweep the whole country with provocations and gunfire. National unity that President Saakashvili seeks so much is out of the question. It’s not as if he ever stopped seeking it! However he has never asked the ethnic groups unwillingly annexed to Georgia in times of Josef Stalin about their opinion. It has always been the primary reason for the current interethnic conflicts taking place in the artificially established state of Georgia. Mr. Saakashvili’s destructive policy has only speeded up the breakaway process of South Ossetia and that is an obvious example for such unstable regions as Adjaria, Djavakha, Kvemo-Kartly, Svaneti, Migrelia and Kakheti which have been confronting the Georgian authority for quite some time. The breakaway of these regions from Georgia is a matter of time in this contingency. Therefore we, Europeans, have to think twice before cooperating with that unstable state!
 
Francis
 
  2  
Reply Wed 12 Aug, 2009 09:43 am
We have to deal too with the propaganda that Vladimir and Boris distill everyday in this forum..

ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Aug, 2009 09:45 am
@politicalanalyst,
The title made me think this was another thread about teabag parties.

0 Replies
 
Ragman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Aug, 2009 10:09 am
@politicalanalyst,
"It's a Rainy Night in Georgia"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_OpYuiniNE
0 Replies
 
Robert Gentel
 
  2  
Reply Wed 12 Aug, 2009 10:14 am
@Francis,
Francis wrote:
We have to deal too with the propaganda that Vladimir and Boris distill everyday in this forum..


And the people who bump every last one of them up, saying the same old tired things in response to the same old tired propaganda.
Francis
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Aug, 2009 11:08 am
@Robert Gentel,
Well, people have their own pet peeves and preferred jokes...
0 Replies
 
Merry Andrew
 
  2  
Reply Wed 12 Aug, 2009 01:07 pm
@Robert Gentel,
There's damned little humor on this site otherwise. I, for one, am pleased as hell when Francis, or anyone else, bumps a dumb thread like this up so that I don't miss it. I need a good political laugh in the early morning.

Thank you, Boris (or whatever your name is), for providing my morning chuckle.
Robert Gentel
 
  2  
Reply Wed 12 Aug, 2009 02:57 pm
@Merry Andrew,
Merry Andrew wrote:
There's damned little humor on this site otherwise.


Nothing is funny that many times in a row (to me at least, but that I'm speaking for myself kinda goes without saying,you know). I don't actually think any of this stuff is all that funny the first time around but it takes all sorts I suppose and I wish I could get as much of a kick out of calling these guys "Vladimir" and "Boris" every single day.
ossobuco
 
  2  
Reply Wed 12 Aug, 2009 03:16 pm
@Robert Gentel,
Thanks to whomever tags the threads - it's handy for viewers like me. Now I barely look at the title and thumb down; opened this one because I saw RG post.
Robert Gentel
 
  5  
Reply Thu 13 Aug, 2009 09:18 am
@ossobuco,
The tagging, like the bumping is also annoying to me. Let me explain some of the moving parts that might not be readily apparent:

1) This is a form of spam. When it contains links it gets pulled, which is work for me and the couple of other people on this site who help pull spam.

2) When you bump it up and tag it, you make it more prevalent. This has resulted in things like it going out on our RSS feed, which means they got their propaganda on a bunch of other sites (like our twitter feed). This way they get to kill many birds with one stone.

3) When you help make their propaganda and spam more prevalent, they (if they notice, which is a decent chance as they are searching social sites like twitter for relevant mentions) will appreciate it and it makes our site even more attractive for spam, which results in more spam.

4) That just means more work for me and the others who help keep the site spam free. Which is a big reason the tireless spam bumpers are annoying to me. Instead of responding, voting it down would help make sure it doesn't get a wider audience from sites syndicating our content.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 13 Aug, 2009 09:23 am
@Robert Gentel,
But, we kinda like it. It's interesting, sociologically.

Cycloptichorn
Robert Gentel
 
  1  
Reply Thu 13 Aug, 2009 09:28 am
@Cycloptichorn,
Like I said, it takes all sorts, even the annoying ones.

It's much easier to like when it doesn't represent an additional, and unwelcome, workload.
Cycloptichorn
 
  0  
Reply Thu 13 Aug, 2009 09:29 am
@Robert Gentel,
Robert Gentel wrote:

Like I said, it takes all sorts, even the annoying ones.

It's much easier to like when it doesn't represent an additional, and unwelcome, workload.


Hey man - wasn't us who set the system up to promote stuff that was responded to. We're just playing within the boundaries you created.

Cycloptichorn
Robert Gentel
 
  2  
Reply Thu 13 Aug, 2009 09:30 am
@Cycloptichorn,
Everything annoying on the site is "within the boundaries I created" because I created the site. That is a pretty pointless point.

Telling you guys that you are being annoying and contributing to more work is also "within the boundaries I created" because I was the idiot who made the whole replying thing.

Instead of faulting the creation of the features, I fault the annoying behavior. It's doubly annoying to see you say that it's my fault for making the features.
Cycloptichorn
 
  0  
Reply Thu 13 Aug, 2009 09:42 am
@Robert Gentel,
Robert Gentel wrote:

Everything annoying on the site is "within the boundaries I created" because I created the site. That is a pretty pointless point.

Telling you guys that you are being annoying and contributing to more work is also "within the boundaries I created" because I was the idiot who made the whole replying thing.

Instead of faulting the creation of the features, I fault the annoying behavior. It's doubly annoying to see you say that it's my fault for making the features.


Didn't anticipate this sort of thing happening?

You are incorrect to fault us for responding to a post on A2K. It isn't 'annoying behavior' on our part. It's natural usage of the site. If people want to respond to this stuff, what's wrong with that? Blaming the users is poor form.

Cycloptichorn
Robert Gentel
 
  2  
Reply Thu 13 Aug, 2009 10:00 am
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Didn't anticipate this sort of thing happening?


Of course I did. It's pretty obvious that when you make these things some people will use them in annoying ways, but that is just not a reason not to make them.

Quote:
You are incorrect to fault us for responding to a post on A2K. It isn't 'annoying behavior' on our part. It's natural usage of the site. If people want to respond to this stuff, what's wrong with that? Blaming the users is poor form.


Don't try to don the mantle of speaking for everyone. The majority of the people here do not like these posts, which is why the majority of the time they remain voted down despite the tireless bumpers.

And you are being a hypocrite, I too am "responding to a post on A2K" which according to you is "natural" and should therefore be above your criticism according to your own twisted logic (it's called a naturalistic fallacy if you want the specific name for your brainfart).
Cycloptichorn
 
  0  
Reply Thu 13 Aug, 2009 10:17 am
@Robert Gentel,
Quote:

And you are being a hypocrite, I too am "responding to a post on A2K" which according to you is "natural" and should therefore be above your criticism according to your own twisted logic (it's called a naturalistic fallacy if you want the specific name for your brainfart).


But, I didn't criticize you for responding; I criticized you for calling our behavior 'annoying' and 'double annoying.' I would never criticize your choice to respond to a post.

If you don't like these posts, you could simply delete them, whether they have a link or not; it would be less risky than hoping people don't respond to them, and there would be less overall annoyance on your part. It would also decrease the spam spreadage through syndication.

But, hey - whatever floats yer boat.

Cycloptichorn
Robert Gentel
 
  3  
Reply Thu 13 Aug, 2009 10:27 am
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:
But, I didn't criticize you for responding; I criticized you for calling our behavior 'annoying' and 'double annoying.' I would never criticize your choice to respond to a post.


I am not criticizing the bumping for merely responding, but for contributing to the generation of more spam while being boring and unfunny. It's no different from what you are doing, you are criticizing the nature of my posts, not the mere fact that I'm posting. Likewise, it's the nature and content of the posts that I criticize. It's a cost/benefit thing. If the additional work came at the expense of interesting posts I'd really not mind. But it really doesn't seem worth it (to me, of course) just to call these guys a Russian name every single day.

Quote:
If you don't like these posts, you could simply delete them, whether they have a link or not; it would be less risky than hoping people don't respond to them, and there would be less overall annoyance on your part. It would also decrease the spam spreadage through syndication.


Without the links it would be political censorship to do so. I am expressing my opinion that this is annoying, but I'm not willing to engage in censorship over it unless it objectively violates our rules (which don't forbid being annoying to Robert). As you said, you enjoy these posts and I'm not going to let my preferences override yours that easily.

I prefer instead to appeal to the folk who are helping them to consider doing things differently. Not all of them are as stubborn and combative as you are, and some of them will be nice enough to help. It's not my style to impose my will, I'd rather argue for it and let others decide what they want to do (even if it ends up being more frustrating it's more fair).

You may note that I was responding to osso, who doesn't seem to like them, but thought tags were helpful. I am explaining why they aren't, and not trying to convince folk like you to be considerate. I know an exercise in futility when I see one.
Cycloptichorn
 
  0  
Reply Thu 13 Aug, 2009 10:31 am
@Robert Gentel,
Quote:


Without the links it would be political censorship to do so. I am expressing my opinion that this is annoying, but I'm not willing to engage in censorship over it unless it objectively violates our rules. As you said, you enjoy these posts and I'm not going to let my preferences override yours that easily.

I prefer instead to appeal to the folk who are helping them to consider doing things differently. Not all of them are as stubborn and combative as you are, and some of them will be nice enough to help.

You may note that I was responding to osso, who doesn't seem to like them, but thought tags were helpful. I am explaining why they aren't, and not trying to convince folk like you to be considerate, I know an exercise in futility when I see one.


Aw; there's no need to be so mean.

You could simply ask folks not to respond to stuff like this. When you start off describing behaviors as 'annoying' - behaviors which, previous to this, neither I (nor most I would suspect) knew caused you extra work - it sort of sets the frame for the discussion. I'm sure I don't have to tell you that people are more likely to engage in the behaviors you like if you approach them in the right way.

Cycloptichorn
High Seas
 
  1  
Reply Thu 13 Aug, 2009 10:56 am
@Robert Gentel,
Robert Gentel wrote:
.....I prefer instead to appeal to the folk who are helping them to consider doing things differently. Not all of them are as stubborn and combative as you are............You may note that I was responding to osso, who doesn't seem to like them, but thought tags were helpful. I am explaining why they aren't, and not trying to convince folk like you to be considerate. I know an exercise in futility when I see one.


This multinomial poster is a unique case, because he changes name with each new thread. I agree with you on the gross abuse of tags (search terms on semantic web) that's been going on since the new format was introduced, but for this thread Osso actually has a point.

Now 2 questions, one technical, the other literary:
- the dos attacks that shut down Twitter, Facebook, and related sites have been traced to some cyberwarfare activity involving that same country this poster is obsessed with. Have you any way of tracing, via whois or other sources?
- the poster's English has improved so much since his first appearance that I hope some literary expert here can figure out if his original incoherent stuff was a put-on.
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » Why is there so much unrest in Georgia?
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 09/22/2019 at 12:34:54