28 Mar 14
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyWhy would you want to cast any of your detractors as 'cowardly' if you are genuinely against "personal attacks", as you seemed to indicate with your choice of copy-pasted wall-of-text on another thread earlier?.
[a reason for thumbs down according to "observations"] ....cowardice in lieu of reply...
28 Mar 14
1 edit
"Postscript: Still "wondering whether there is a dog"?"
I've moved on to: would it matter if there were? I appreciate that for some people, it is axiomatic that it does matter. I, however, think there are some presuppositions to be examined regarding the existence of a dog (or The Dog, if you prefer). Existence in and of itself entails no ethical imperatives.
Edit: sorry, this is off topic. Should be a separate thread.
29 Mar 14
Originally posted by SwissGambitGB long ago embraced his status as the King of the Thumbed Down Post. It's a twisted form of attention-whoring. I don't believe any of that rubbish about 'cowardice'. [...] It's all about the bizarro-personality cult centered on him. He takes pride in being loathed. Kind of like a 'heel' character in pro wrestling. The worst reaction is no reaction.
Here is a peculiar example of what you're describing from the "Interacting with 'Angry Atheists'" thread:
Grampy Bobby: ""...[If I were an atheist and] if I happened to see these quotations in Grampy Bobby's Red Hot Pawn Profile [Grampy Bobby's profile quotations inserted here] ...I'd dislike him."
29 Mar 14
The only thing i find disappointing on the Spirituality Forums, it is so limited. We never hear from other religions. Catholic, Christians, J. W.'s and Atheists. If there are others, stand and be counted. Tell us of your beliefs. At least I will find them fascinating.
Pudge
29 Mar 14
Originally posted by FMFSubtracting GB as the focal point, this is an attendant concept to our other conversation, relative to the acceptance/rejection of atheists to Christians on the basis of nothing more than the originator and why I often contemplated "swapping" identities with an atheist for experimentation purposes.
Originally posted by Grampy Bobby on another thread
[b][Thumbs down express disapproval] as well as personal dislike of being threatened and subliminal hatred as well as cowardice in lieu of reply.
"... thumbs up": likes as with Facebook; "thumbs down": kneejerk emotional reactions sans rational thought.
I don't use Thumbs Down myself [although ...[text shortened]... l thought[/b]
What do any of you Deployers Of Thumbs Down out there make of these assertions?[/b]
There are more than a few on this forum who literally cannot help themselves: when they see who the post is from, they 'vote' their feelings--- completely and utterly detached from the content of the post.
29 Mar 14
Originally posted by FreakyKBHIs there a way to see who votes for what? Or are you basing this observation on something else?
There are more than a few on this forum who literally cannot help themselves: when they see who the post is from, they 'vote' their feelings--- completely and utterly detached from the content of the post.
29 Mar 14
Originally posted by PudgenikAh, well there's the rub, you see. The idea that a religion must be based on beliefs is a peculiarly Christian one, due the heavy emphasis on dogma since the time of Origen and Augustine. There are other religions which are based on practice, on ritual acts (of purification or whatever), meditation, and so. It doesn't matter what you believe in; so there isn't much to discuss or report; one just does it (or not, as the case may be). Subject for some other thread, I guess.
The only thing i find disappointing on the Spirituality Forums, it is so limited. We never hear from other religions. Catholic, Christians, J. W.'s and Atheists. If there are others, stand and be counted. Tell us of your beliefs. At least I will find them fascinating.
Pudge
29 Mar 14
Originally posted by FreakyKBHHow do you know these thumbs up and thumbs down are "utterly detached from the content of the post"?
There are more than a few on this forum who literally cannot help themselves: when they see who the post is from, they 'vote' their feelings--- completely and utterly detached from the content of the post.
29 Mar 14
Originally posted by twhiteheadFrom FMF:
Is there a way to see who votes for what? Or are you basing this observation on something else?
How do you know these thumbs up and thumbs down are "utterly detached from the content of the post"?
[responding to both for brevity]
Mere, speculative feeling.
Reasonable, thoughtful feeling.
Liken it to tone, if you will.
When I ask my wife "what's wrong," and she says "nothing," I think we can all agree I'm in deep shiite.
29 Mar 14
Originally posted by FreakyKBHYou said "There are more than a few on this forum" who do it. Who are they? You seem to have, in a sense, counted them. Why not name these "more than a few"? You presumably have specific people in mind, right?
From FMF:
[b]How do you know these thumbs up and thumbs down are "utterly detached from the content of the post"?
[responding to both for brevity]
Mere, speculative feeling.
Reasonable, thoughtful feeling.
Liken it to tone, if you will.
When I ask my wife "what's wrong," and she says "nothing," I think we can all agree I'm in deep shiite.[/b]
29 Mar 14
Originally posted by FMFYou said "There are more than a few on this forum" who do it.
You said "There are more than a few on this forum" who do it. Who are they? You seem to have, in a sense, counted them. Why not name these "more than a few"? You presumably have specific people in mind, right?
Yes.
Yes I did say that.
Who are they?
I dunno.
You seem to have, in a sense, counted them.
Loosely.
Why not name these "more than a few"?
As in, give them a group name, like "The Thumbs Downers," or "The Athumbersists," or maybe even "Dumb and Downthumber?"
You presumably have specific people in mind, right?
Very, very specific.
So specific, really.
Not even a little vague in my mind.
30 Mar 14
Originally posted by FreakyKBHYou're asked who these posters are. You say you don't know. You're asked if you have specific posters in mind. You say yes, very specific. You either do know know who you mean or you don't. Why not tell us who you think they are so they can ~ if they wish to ~ rebut or substantiate your suggestion that their thumbs up and thumbs down are "utterly detached from the content of the post"?
[b]You said "There are more than a few on this forum" who do it.
Yes.
Yes I did say that.
Who are they?
I dunno.
You seem to have, in a sense, counted them.
Loosely.
Why not name these "more than a few"?
As in, give them a group name, like "The Thumbs Downers," or "The Athumbersists," or maybe even "Dumb and Downthumb ...[text shortened]... ind, right?[/b]
Very, very specific.
So specific, really.
Not even a little vague in my mind.[/b]
30 Mar 14
Originally posted by FMFWhat good would it do to tell you who I think it is, other than cause more controversy?
You're asked who these posters are. You say you don't know. You're asked if you have specific posters in mind. You say yes, very specific. You either do know know who you mean or you don't. Why not tell us who you think they are so they can ~ if they wish to ~ rebut or substantiate your suggestion that their thumbs up and thumbs down are "utterly detached from the content of the post"?
Do you really think this forum needs more controversy?
30 Mar 14
Originally posted by FreakyKBHI think you have tried to dish out a deliberately vague and condescending smearing of people in this community and are now running away from having to substantiate it. 🙂
What good would it do to tell you who I think it is, other than cause more controversy?
Do you really think this forum needs more controversy?