Thread derailments

[jfuh]

This thread is to give award to the top derailing member on DP. Derailing means bringing into a thread a completely unrelated topic all together for the purpose to either entice flame from other members or to shut the thread up.
There's a lot of this going on these days by certain members so I wanted to start a thread to hand out the derailing king award.
Derailment includes the first post to derail, if the thread manages to get back on track the next post to derail will also count.
Here's an example of a derailment. link
For a post to actually qualify however another member must second the post thus to eliminate personal vendettas or unpopularity contests.

 

[aps]

Now although I'll concede that CurrentAffairs is sometimes deserving of criticism along these lines, this is a crappy example. It's clear what he was getting at, that he agrees that that **** was terrible, but that that was not at all representative of the actions of the rest of the troops. Now although this is not directly an argument as to whether or not raping and murdering innocents is bad (because that is obviously a point requiring a huge amount of argumentation), it is certainly within the scope of significant related topics (as it is to the point of whether or not it is reasonable to dedicate time talking about something a troop did that we can all agree is awful when we don't dedicate time talking about something a troop did that we can all agree was great).

Sorry, galenrox, but he did derail that thread and the one I posted about the guy who weeped as he pled guilty. NO ONE mentioned anything about such behavior being prevalent within our current service members, but he had to harp on that issue. For what? Let me repeat. NO ONE was attacking our troops in that thread, but he had to keep pointing out all the good things our troops do. WHY? That was not the purpose of the thread. I was outraged at what these particular people did. He had to go on his tirade, and it derailed the thread. Even NYU said something to him.

 

[Gardener]

I imagine there is a fine line between comments that are tangental and those that are derailing in nature.

I imagine, too, that the way we all evaluate such is tied to the degree with which we agree with the politics of those who did or did not derail.

I might even go so far as to say that the way people decide whether or not Currentaffairs derailed a thread probably has more to do with their opinions of currentaffairs in general than it does anything else.

 

[jfuh]

I imagine there is a fine line between comments that are tangental and those that are derailing in nature.

I imagine, too, that the way we all evaluate such is tied to the degree with which we agree with the politics of those who did or did not derail.

I might even go so far as to say that the way people decide whether or not Currentaffairs derailed a thread probably has more to do with their opinions of currentaffairs in general than it does anything else.

Thus all the need more for another member to second the motion of "derailing":2wave:

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by Gardener:
I might even go so far as to say that the way people decide whether or not Currentaffairs derailed a thread probably has more to do with their opinions of currentaffairs in general than it does anything else.

But those opinions could be based on his [CurrentAffairs] MO. He does have a track record of this [sarcastic unrelated comments]. However, the example jfuh gave was in the gray area. Galen was right. Although CA is a bonifide "derailer" [my comment, not galen's], there are better examples out there.

 

[CurrentAffairs]

This thread is to give award to the top derailing member on DP. Derailing means bringing into a thread a completely unrelated topic all together for the purpose to either entice flame from other members or to shut the thread up.
There's a lot of this going on these days by certain members so I wanted to start a thread to hand out the derailing king award.
Derailment includes the first post to derail, if the thread manages to get back on track the next post to derail will also count.
Here's an example of a derailment. link
For a post to actually qualify however another member must second the post thus to eliminate personal vendettas or unpopularity contests.

It's very interesting how the mere simple mention of good soldiers doing good things in Iraq has thrown your sorry ***** *** into such a tizzy. It speaks volumes for your hate-filled partisanship. I was happy to expose it. :2wave:

 

[CurrentAffairs]

It's clear what he was getting at, that he agrees that that **** was terrible, but that that was not at all representative of the actions of the rest of the troops.

Thank you. Dear God, galen, are you the only one capable of understanding this?

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by CurrentAffairs:
Thank you. Dear God, galen, are you the only one capable of understanding this?

You just demonstrated how prejudiced you are. I sided with galen too, yet you still stated he was the only one!

 

[talloulou]

This thread is to give award to the top derailing member on DP. Derailing means bringing into a thread a completely unrelated topic all together for the purpose to either entice flame from other members or to shut the thread up.
There's a lot of this going on these days by certain members so I wanted to start a thread to hand out the derailing king award.
Derailment includes the first post to derail, if the thread manages to get back on track the next post to derail will also count.
Here's an example of a derailment. link
For a post to actually qualify however another member must second the post thus to eliminate personal vendettas or unpopularity contests.

I clicked the link and didn't see a problem. It appears jfuh is just whining as per usual.

 

[talloulou]

Sorry, galenrox, but he did derail that thread and the one I posted about the guy who weeped as he pled guilty. NO ONE mentioned anything about such behavior being prevalent within our current service members, but he had to harp on that issue. For what? Let me repeat. NO ONE was attacking our troops in that thread, but he had to keep pointing out all the good things our troops do. WHY? That was not the purpose of the thread. I was outraged at what these particular people did. He had to go on his tirade, and it derailed the thread. Even NYU said something to him.

Because it's good to put things in perspective. What I don't understand is how someone adding "perspective" to a thread could piss people off.

Perfect example someone on another forum posted a youtube video of soldiers driving crazy in a humvee in Iraq. Then people were posting about the way they drive like a$$holes and no wonder the Iraqi's hate us.

So I responded by posting a youtube video of our soldiers getting shot at while driving. This shed light on why perhaps they drive fast and don't like to stop.

It's called perspective.

If someone points out that there are many more good soldiers while agreeing that there are some real pieces of $hit that's perspective.

 

[CurrentAffairs]

You just demonstrated how prejudiced you are. I sided with galen too, yet you still stated he was the only one!

:lol:

no, I asked if he was the only one. I missed your post...till now.

 

[CurrentAffairs]

Perfect example someone on another forum posted a youtube video of soldiers driving crazy in a humvee in Iraq. Then people were posting about the way they drive like a$$holes and no wonder the Iraqi's hate us.

So I responded by posting a youtube video of our soldiers getting shot at while driving. This shed light on why perhaps they drive fast and don't like to stop.

It's called perspective.

If someone points out that there are many more good soldiers while agreeing that there are some real pieces of $hit that's perspective.

Interesting. Did jfuh throw his normal gay hissy fit when you "derailed" the thread in such a way? :lol:

 

[talloulou]

Interesting. Did jfuh throw his normal gay hissy fit when you "derailed" the thread in such a way? :lol:

I don't believe jfuh ever saw said thread. He did throw a hissy fit when I accused him of kissing jallman's a$$. :mrgreen: But he didn't start a basement rant about it which is interesting because that certainly would have been more valid than this bull$hit. But it's impossible to understand jfuh. I know he didn't win but he'll always be the biggest a$$hat in my mind.

 

[jfuh]

I don't believe jfuh ever saw said thread. He did throw a hissy fit when I accused him of kissing jallman's a$$. But he didn't start a basement rant about it which is interesting because that certainly would have been more valid than this bull$hit. But it's impossible to understa d jfuh. I know he didn't win but he'll always be the biggest a$$hat in my mind.

Now why would I need to start a basement rant about it when I get to kick your a#s backwards and forwards upstairs without the need to result to profanities? You can't even post honestly which is why you needed to come up with the miserable kissing post.
At least be honest, your kisses were for the purpose of destracting. Just the same as you are doing here; posting only but something other than what is asked. But then this is the basement so I'll end with this, go and fuc# yourself for fuc#king with any real person might get you pregnant and you'll have another kid that grows up getting screwed.
Azzhat? Don't worry girlie, your time will come - though to be fair, you're not the greatest azzhat here so even being a moron you can't win much less a debate.

 

[aps]

What I find so intersting is that the libs in this thread attacked the derailing of the threads. The cons in this thread attacked the people who attacked the derailing of threads. It always amazes me to see the cons resorting to elementary-school behavior. galenrox, this excludes you....and only you.

CurrentAffairs and talloulou, grow up.

 

[Gardener]

lol, go ask around, see who is more widely respected, you or her. I dare you.

I tend to like both of them, myself.

I respect the fact that jfuh has shown an ability to articulate various positions that display the fact he isn't a dogmatic leftist who simply offers trite p.c. apologia. He strikes me as a liberal by principle and I like that.

I respect the fact talloulou is pretty much a straight shooter who again, isn't dogmatic but just says what she thinks. She is very candid and I like that.


I guess it is the more dogmatic people who I respect the least, and there is certainly no shortage of these. Between the knee jerk authoritarian leftists who hate Bush so much they support the mullahs while offering mindless p.c. apologia, and the minless brainwashed righties who begin half of their postings with "you liberals" just like the radio personalities they parrot so well, there are many here who deserve little respect.

 

[CurrentAffairs]

lol, go ask around, see who is more widely respected, you or her. I dare you.

Could I weigh in on this please? Because I happen to think jfuh is a pile of pons sucking scum.

:2wave:

 

[CurrentAffairs]

What I find so intersting is that the libs in this thread attacked the derailing of the threads. The cons in this thread attacked the people who attacked the derailing of threads. It always amazes me to see the cons resorting to elementary-school behavior. galenrox, this excludes you....and only you.

CurrentAffairs and talloulou, grow up.

My single mention of a soldiers good deeds is elementary behavior and jfuh starting a basement attack thread is not, right? :lol: Interesting how this has struck such a nerve with you. Might I suggest looking inward on this one, aps? Why does a soldier's good deeds disgust you so much?

 

[talloulou]

What I find so intersting is that the libs in this thread attacked the derailing of the threads. The cons in this thread attacked the people who attacked the derailing of threads. It always amazes me to see the cons resorting to elementary-school behavior. galenrox, this excludes you....and only you.

CurrentAffairs and talloulou, grow up.

Hey I admit my behavior is childish though I honestly think that jfuh's original complaint is lame and unfounded or at least the post he used as an example was very weak. I also did address it in a serious fair way before I moved on to taking potshots at jfuh.

A long time ago jfuh lied in a debate. Lied knowingly and when I called him on that lie he said he was "kidding." He never apologized or admitted he was wrong but just crept off acting like I couldn't take a joke. There was no way his original lie was a "joke." I like to think I get "funny" and he was definitely lying vs. trying to be funny. Anyway after that once in awhile he'd take shots at me and I'd blast him every chance I got and he'd creep off again. Since then I have lost all respect for him and usually jump at any chance to insult him. I had actually gotten over it all and lost interest as I think he had me on ignore for a really long time. But lately he's began replying to my posts again and my distaste for him is rearing it's ugly head again. So yeah if someone mentions jfuh in the basement, even if it's jfuh himself, I'm gonna jump all over it! I can't stand self righteous arrogant ba$tard$ and I hate liars.

But I'm still a non-smoker so clearly you'll forgive me for my childish discretions.

 

[billybobama]

You have a very typical herd mentality.

 

[cherokee]

You have a very typical herd mentality.

Hey look it’s the f.u.c.k.i.n.g-retarded idiot from up stairs that thinks its ok to show a 5-year-old violent images. How’s it going you little inbreed bastard? Tell me sometime if you can get you tiny brain around it why do you feel its ok and how much do you think a 5-year-old mind can comprehend about war.
How about an answer and no spin dumbass..

 

[danarhea]

I imagine there is a fine line between comments that are tangental and those that are derailing in nature.

I imagine, too, that the way we all evaluate such is tied to the degree with which we agree with the politics of those who did or did not derail.

I might even go so far as to say that the way people decide whether or not Currentaffairs derailed a thread probably has more to do with their opinions of currentaffairs in general than it does anything else.

Yes, there is a fine line, and CurrentAffairs has a knack of dancing right around that line. No, he does not come out and derail threads. Instead, he makes little snide remarks which other people respond to, thus derailing the thread. His behavior is not limited to the threads which are being discussed here, but to the vast majority of threads in general. After a thread is ruined, he can then say "I didn't derail anything, someone else did", and you know what? He is right. He may have instigated the derailing with his snide comments, but others took the bait, and as we all know, it takes two to tango. My advise is, if CurrentAffairs gets to you that much, just put him on ignore. As long as he can get a rise out of you, he will continue with the snide remarks, thread derailments will continue, and he will always be able to claim that it is your fault, and not his. Ignore him, and his lonely, childish snipes will look just as lame as they are. In other words, don't feed the troll.

 

[CurrentAffairs]

Yes, there is a fine line, and CurrentAffairs has a knack of dancing right around that line. No, he does not come out and derail threads. Instead, he makes little snide remarks which other people respond to, thus derailing the thread. His behavior is not limited to the threads which are being discussed here, but to the vast majority of threads in general. After a thread is ruined, he can then say "I didn't derail anything, someone else did", and you know what? He is right. He may have instigated the derailing with his snide comments, but others took the bait, and as we all know, it takes two to tango. My advise is, if CurrentAffairs gets to you that much, just put him on ignore. As long as he can get a rise out of you, he will continue with the snide remarks, thread derailments will continue, and he will always be able to claim that it is your fault, and not his. Ignore him, and his lonely, childish snipes will look just as lame as they are. In other words, don't feed the troll.

Why is saying something positive about our troops looked at as snide, dana? How sad.

 

[talloulou]

You have a very typical herd mentality.

Are you saying I go after jfuh because he's sick and weak looking? Hmmm. Maybe you're right. I'll think on that. Perhaps I should leave him alone and pick on someone my own size. :mrgreen:

 

[jfuh]

Are you saying I go after jfuh because he's sick and weak looking? Hmmm. Maybe you're right. I'll think on that. Perhaps I should leave him alone and pick on someone my own size. :mrgreen:

Size 22? Perhaps you should get over your self pitying. You "pick" on me because you can't continue the debate. Even here, to attack thread derailments and all you have to contribute is more pathetic and weak attacks on me. Go figure.