|
Anonymous #1
|
MushroomTrip for mod?
#9598903 - 01/13/09 12:12 AM (15 years, 18 days ago) |
|
|
Should MushroomTrip be a mod in P&S? Come on now, be honest. Don't you think she should get a chance?
|
Anonymous #2
|
|
Jesus tapdancing Christ on a crutch, PLEASE NO. I'll actually stop going to P&S if this happens.
|
Anonymous #3
|
|
HELLL NO! She'd abuse that power way worse than Veritas does.
|
Anonymous #4
|
|
She is one of the most arrogant people i have ever come across. I'm surprised she hasn't been banned before, she seems incapable of debating without using personalisms.
|
Anonymous #2
|
|
Veritas is a good poster and I can grudgingly understand the rationale behind some of her decisions as moderator.
On the other hand, I've never seen anything I liked come from MT. To the contrary, I see rambling, egotistical, meaningless heaps of pointless semantics and constant vomit-inducing ass-slapping with Fireworks_God. She deserves no power what so ever over that forum. It will become even less open to new ideas with her in control.
|
Anonymous #1
|
|
I think you guys are afraid of women. The forum is much better with Veritas as a mod. If one woman can make it that much better, two women would fix it completely. Why should guys have all the power?
|
Anonymous #2
|
|
Don't strawman me. I like Veritas fine. MT, on the other hand, is nails on a chalkboard.
I'd be just as outraged if you suggested Fireworks_God for mod.
(Is that you?)
|
Anonymous #5
|
|
sorry, no.
i mean i don't give a shit a guess. let P&S continue to be fancy OTD.
|
Anonymous #6
|
|
F_G is an incredibly intelligent, unbiased human being compared to MT.
I'd far rather have him be a mod than her.
|
Anonymous #2
|
|
They strike me as the same person. They're always saying the same basic shit, they have the same oversized sigs full of red pandas, and they're constantly making out all over P&S.
|
Anonymous #6
|
|
Yes, but if you actually read F_G's posts, he actually comes across as intelligent. MT, on the other hand, seems to be argumentative just for the sake of being argumentative.
|
Anonymous #7
|
|
Quote:
Anonymous #2 said: I'd be just as outraged if you suggested Fireworks_God for mod.
(Is that you?)
Nope, this is me. Neither of us would even want to be a mod, so I don't see why adjust had to make this in the first place but to satisfy his lust for her. 
Quote:
Anonymous #2 said: ...and they're constantly making out all over P&S.
Since when?
|
Anonymous #2
|
|
I don't see him often, honestly. But when I do see him he's engaging in exactly the same type of wall-of-text run-'em-till-they're-blue-in-the-face debate style as MT. They are both ruiners of threads from what I have seen and don't seem to contribute much to discussion other than flirtation with each other and a tragically highfalutin equivalent to OC's concise skepticism.
|
Anonymous #2
|
|
Yeah, I see you there, getting ready to pick apart everything I say sentence-by-sentence while introducing several new tangentially related subjects with each rebuttal until the discussion is rendered totally incoherent. No thanks.
|
Anonymous #7
|
|
Its a tragedy to use a debate forum to debate though, now isn't it?
|
Anonymous #4
|
|
Sentence by sentence is the best way to take what your saying out of context while also drawing the debate into semi related, trivialities. Thus avoiding the central point of the argument, while also making the conversation incoherent enough that their ramblings actually fit in perfectly.
|
Anonymous #8
|
|
F_G may be a douche, but he isn't an insane douche.
|
Anonymous #9
|
|
Quote:
Don't you think she should get a chance?
Never. I think Ythan is intelligent enough to agree.
MT is one of the very few posters I considered rating poorly. She is exceptionally irritating.
|
Anonymous #2
|
|
Hey, we've all got our own styles of debate, I'm just glad I've only seen your debates as an observer. I guess you could take that as a compliment. I don't think our viewpoints run particularly contrary. I'd just go insane if i had to deal with that kind of argument. I can deal with a complex point-by-point argument, but I also like them to remain on-point. You are a master of rhetorical obfuscation.
|
Anonymous #7
|
|
Quote:
Anonymous #4 said: Sentence by sentence is the best way to take what your saying out of context while also drawing the debate into semi related, trivialities. Thus avoiding the central point of the argument, while also making the conversation incoherent enough that their ramblings actually fit in perfectly.
Nice thought, but I don't see any relevance, as taking things line-by-line is a technique employed by me only in certain circumstances. Sometimes the central point that someone is making isn't what others are interested in debating, so they instead focus on inconsistencies and other weak areas. If anything, it can be a good service to those proposing ideas, as weaker elements can be demonstrated as so and more accurate reflections of reality can be put in their place.
I think some people might get butt-hurt that someone isn't agreeing with them.
|
|