What is the short term/long term future of a2k?

@oralloy,

Did I lie? Can you provide me with an example of said lie and prove that it was or is not the truth?

you occasionally serve as momentary diversion. Rarely anything else.

1 Reply

@Sturgis,

Sturgis wrote:

Did I lie?

Yes.

Sturgis wrote:

Can you provide me with an example of said lie

Your previous post (not the one that I am responding to, but the one before that) where you falsely accused me of whining.

Sturgis wrote:

and prove that it was or is not the truth?

Your failure to provide any example of whining proves that your accusation is untrue.

Sturgis wrote:

you occasionally serve as momentary diversion. Rarely anything else.

That's because you have no interest in truth or facts.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

I find of Oralloy's posts to be silly. The only problem is that he makes the same ridiculous points in post after post. It would be nice if occasionally he had a different take on something, or something new to say.

1) When he says "progressives are deranged" how do you argue with that? It isn't really anything. it is like me saying "asparagus tastes like crap" or "Mozart is boring", he is expressing his own opinion of progressives.

2) He incessantly argues for an absolute right to have a gun. There is nothing wrong with that, except that his view is rather simplistic. Guns good, restrictions bad. There isn't anything to even discuss here.

3) He takes a pretty predictable ideological position on any current event. I have never seen him break from the script. I might argue sometimes with his definitions of words... using "lynching" to describe an professional investigation where the defendants will be afforded due process is a stretch... but Oralloy is pushing a rather predictable ideological position, and twisting words to mean whatever you want them to mean is par for the course.

For the amount of words... I wish there was some independent thought or an ability to leave a narrow conservative ideological bubble. As it is, I could write Oralloy's posts for him.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

Can you challenge any of my facts or logic?

Do you accept that if you can't, that probably means that I am correct?

1 Reply

@oralloy,

I guess I can't.

Most of your "facts" aren't facts... they are opinions. I can't challenge opinions. The rest of times I have challenged you, you responded with twisted definitions of words. Again, that is not something argue about.

The biggest problem with your "facts" has nothing to do with whether they are correct or not.

The problem is that they are meaningless. You are pushing ideological slogans. Arguing with you is like arguing with a bumper sticker.

2 Replies

@maxdancona,

My challenge (for everyone) is this...

Show me some thoughtfulness to your arguments.

Show that you are intelligent enough to see things from more than one perspective. Sometimes Trump has been proven right, admit it. Sometimes Pelosi has been proven right. A thoughtful person will be able to see both.

The ideological bubbles are the greatest threat to real discussion. If everyone is stuck in narrow little ideological ruts with no ability for any independent thought, then we will be reduced to just yelling slogans at each other.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

Most of your "facts" aren't facts... they are opinions. I can't challenge opinions.

That is incorrect. My facts are facts. The reason why you cannot challenge them is because my facts are 100% true.

As an example: It is a fact that Israel has repeatedly offered the Palestinians a just peace based on 1967 borders.

It is a fact that progressives deliberately violate people's gun rights, and for no reason other than sadistic pleasure.

It is a fact that the primary goal of Black Lives Matter is to prevent police officers from defending themselves.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

1. My facts are facts. A great bumper sticker.

2. It is a fact that Israel has repeatedly offered the Palestinians a just peace based on 1967 borders. Arguably true. But it is confirmation bias. You are clinging to one fact that supports your narrow ideological viewpoint and ignoring all of the other facts.

3. progressives deliberately violate people's gun rights, and for no reason other than sadistic pleasure. This is an ad-hominem attack, and a slogan. It is meaningless. What evidence would you accept that "progressives" weren't taking "sadistic pleasure"?

4. the primary goal of Black Lives Matter is to prevent police officers from defending themselves. This is another ad-hominem attack. It is also meaningless. Your mind-reading skills are impressive.

These are meaningless argument. There is no substance to any of them. There is really nothing to argue against (unless you want me argue about your opinion of the internal mental state of thousands of BLM supporters).

There is no point to arguing any of these "facts". You aren't making any serious arguments. You are just spouting meaningless ideological slogans.

2 Replies

@maxdancona,

For anything that I claim is a fact... I will answer this question.

What evidence will change your mind and make you decide that thing you thought was a "fact" is actually untrue?

If you can't answer that question... then it isn't a fact.

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

2. It is a fact that Israel has repeatedly offered the Palestinians a just peace based on 1967 borders. Arguably true.

Completely true.

maxdancona wrote:

But it is confirmation bias.

No it isn't. It's a fact.

maxdancona wrote:

You are clinging to one fact that supports your narrow ideological viewpoint

Providing facts that prove that I am correct is proper debate.

maxdancona wrote:

and ignoring all of the other facts.

Irrelevant facts are rightly ignored. The number of gumballs in a gumball machine may well be a fact, but it is not at all relevant to the fact that Israel has repeatedly offered the Palestinians a just settlement.

maxdancona wrote:

3. progressives deliberately violate people's gun rights, and for no reason other than sadistic pleasure. This is an ad-hominem attacks, and a slogan. It is meaningless.

That progressives commit atrocities is a good reason to oppose them.

maxdancona wrote:

4. the primary goal of Black Lives Matter is to prevent police officers from defending themselves. This is another ad-hominem attack. It is also meaningless.

That BLM goons want police officers to be murdered is a good reason to oppose them.

maxdancona wrote:

Your mind-reading skills are impressive.

No mind reading. I just pay attention to what they are actually demanding.

maxdancona wrote:

These are meaningless argument. There is no substance to any of them.

That is incorrect. All of them are facts.

maxdancona wrote:

There is really nothing to argue against (unless you want me argue about your opinion of the internal mental state of thousands of BLM supporters).

Not an opinion. It is their actual position.

maxdancona wrote:

There is no point to arguing any of these "facts".

Only because they are true and therefore pretty difficult to argue against.

maxdancona wrote:

You aren't making any serious arguments.

Yes I am. That's why you cannot disprove any of the facts that I provided.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

You are just giving knee-jerk responses. There is no thoughtfulness, no sign of questioning, no attempt to see things from any other perfective.

You think you are right because you think you are right because you are right. Fine. I get it .

You keep on saying the same thing over and over again in thread after thread. How about showing some intelligence beyond just shouting bumper stickers.

2 Replies

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

You are just giving knee-jerk responses.

I am posting facts that prove that I am right.

maxdancona wrote:

You think you are right because you think you are right because you are right.

No. I know I am right because I am well informed.

maxdancona wrote:

You keep on saying the same thing over and over again in thread after thread. How about showing some intelligence beyond just shouting bumper stickers.

I think posting facts is the way to go. It serves me well.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

I am posting facts that prove that I am right.
No. I know I am right because I am well informed.
I think posting facts is the way to go. It serves me well.

I wish you should show a little more intellectual depth then that. That is all.

Intelligence includes the ability to see things from more than one point of view.

1 Reply

@tsarstepan,

Short Term............................................................................................Long Term

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

Quote:

My challenge (for everyone) is this...

Show me some thoughtfulness to your arguments.

I was hoping you would have that attitude when discussing things you don’t necessarily agree with. You showed a distinct lack of it by dismissing without counter argument my argument comparing biological life forms to computer technology.

To be fair, I don’t know if that was due to your attitude or the lack of knowledge in one or more areas of science.

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

You keep on saying the same thing over and over again in thread after thread. How about showing some intelligence beyond just shouting bumper stickers.

Oralloy does. He presented information about the Central Park incident between the man who told the woman to leash her dog and the woman who called the police on him that shed more light and helped me better understand the situation.

I didn't completely agree with him that the man was necessarily threatening the woman and her dog in the way the police might have assumed based on the call, but of course that is the police's job to investigate and determine whether a threat is real or just someone posturing in the heat of a street argument.

We don't have to agree to learn from each other. By exchanging POVs and listening, we gain some idea of how other people think, even while we disagree with them. It all amounts to food for thought in different ways.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

Intelligence includes the ability to see things from more than one point of view.

So when some progressive starts saying that 2+2=5, instead of me saying that they are wrong you think I should see things from their point of view?

0 Replies

@livinglava,

Hmmm......

Oralloy came down on the side of a White woman against a Black man and reached the conclusion that progressives are wrong.

That is a knee-jerk response requiring zero thought. Oralloy is exactly on script. He doesn't even need to post it... the position he is going to take on this story is obvious. I could have written his opinion for him.

Thoughtfulness means that you occasionally say.... you know, the other side has a point in this case because evidence suggests that my original impression might not be correct. Strangely, in this particular story I think Oralloy has a point. I certainly don't think this woman should have lost her job.

If Oralloy ever was able to look at something from a different perspective, I would be impressed.

3 Replies

@maxdancona,

Have you ever considered the possibility that the reason why I say that progressives are wrong is because progressives are wrong?

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

Hmmm......

Oralloy came down on the side of a White woman against a Black man and reached the conclusion that progressives are wrong.

Maybe or maybe not, idk. The point is that no one who was on the side of the black man ever mentioned the dog-threat, so it took Oralloy mentioning it in a post for it to even come up.

Quote:

That is a knee-jerk response requiring zero thought. Oralloy is exactly on script. He doesn't even need to post it... the position he is going to take on this story is obvious. I could have written his opinion for him.

It's no different from the position you take defending crime. You both may be biased in your own ways, but you both post information that isn't just angry provocations and cursing, thank God.

Quote:

Thoughtfulness means that you occasionally say.... you know, the other side has a point in this case because evidence suggests that my original impression might not be correct. Strangely, in this particular story I think Oralloy has a point. I certainly don't think this woman should have lost her job.

I think corporate people have gotten the idea that they can fire anyone who shows up on the radar of the media, and the media is racist in that they try to compensate for their own racism by withholding the same critical evaluation they would have for a white person. It's basically the same thing as when you complain at a store and they don't want to tell you're wrong, even though they know you are, because they want to kiss up to you and keep your business. Black people deserve honesty in addition to not having racism done to them. When you lie to someone and tell them they are right without even giving them the respect to really evaluate what they did one way or the other, that in itself is form of disrespect, one you can get away with easily because you're just giving them what they want despite your indifference (actually you're giving them what they want to hide your indifference)

0 Replies

What is the short term/long term future of a2k?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know