Should SR71 invite posters from other forums here for sport?

[Watser?]

It was the lulziest thrad ever! It's so sad that the best moment of the entire internets is already behind us

[S.Vashti]

Originally Posted by livius drusus

SR71, there's something you should know about JoeP. Once upon a time, many years ago, Joe started a thrad. It went places. Dark places. Crazy places. Places where the lulz careen against the walls at a glass-shattering pitch until you can no longer distinguish between mirth and agony.

He's been chasing that dragon ever since.

That was a truly awesome, awesome thread.

[JoeP]

Oh, that thread. Never thought of it since.

[SR71]

Originally Posted by ITSOZAZ

well you could just say something like this:

thekre's a webqsite ... peopple.

OK ITSOZAZ, done. Please delete that blurb in your previous post so the Randroids don't stumble onto this. That would not be too 11 11.

I'll PM you the link.

[JoeP]

New readers would need to be aware that the poster "Wonderbread Leotard" (who appears quite mild and reasonable on page 1) is in fact the "Sovereign" addressed in the OP (he requested a name change a long time after the start of the thread).

[SR71]

Originally Posted by livius drusus

SR71, there's something you should know about JoeP. Once upon a time, many years ago, Joe started a thrad. It went places. Dark places. Crazy places. Places where the lulz careen against the walls at a glass-shattering pitch until you can no longer distinguish between mirth and agony.

He's been chasing that dragon ever since.

I spent some time there, smelling the faded aroma, feeling the texture, admiring the extracted viscera. A melee of the highest caliber. Alas, the prospects of the industrial strength TeaTards and Randroids execution of battle are not comparable, qualitatively.

There would be geysers of Objectivist gobbledy gook, mountains of non sensical babbling about negative rights, great oceans of the Obamaphobic vitriol and bombast, interminable raving about taxation and theft, vast and endless plains of circular argument, misrepresentation, interrupted only by disingenuous tactic and gambit of every description. All this, and nothing of substance. Thus augur the prospects, should we choose to embark on such an adventure.

[JoeP]

The one question you have to ask yourself, SR71, is: would there be a quality meltdown departure / self-banning rant?

(Bonus question: how many times did Sovereign / Wondertard / Sophia say he was leaving for ever?)

[Deadlokd]

Roll 2D20 and add his Lost Face score.

[thedoc]

I didn't know there were so many Satyr/Apaosha socks on this site?

[ChuckF]

Originally Posted by thedoc

I didn't know there were so many Satyr/Apaosha socks on this site?

There are. There are at least 12 that I know of personally.

[Sock Puppet]

I'm Satyr and so's my wife!

[Doctor X]

Liv erected a pole . . . no . . . wait.

--J.D.

[Gonzo]

Originally Posted by Chris Porter

Do not want.

Polish person trying to run away, but still hopelessly trapped in Poland.

[Qingdai]

Originally Posted by thedoc

I didn't know there were so many Satyr/Apaosha socks on this site?

No, lemurs.

[SR71]

Originally Posted by JoeP

The one question you have to ask yourself, SR71, is: would there be a quality meltdown departure / self-banning rant?

(Bonus question: how many times did Sovereign / Wondertard / Sophia say he was leaving for ever?)

That would be hard to predict. Really can't even venture a guess. There would be plenty of fuss and feathers, that much is certain.

[Clutch Munny]

Originally Posted by thedoc

I didn't know there were so many Satyr/Apaosha socks on this site?

In a world with 7 billion people, no explanation for occasional perceived commonalities is better than the assumption that they are all just secret versions of the half-dozen people you met on some forum, once.

[Doctor X]

Originally Posted by SR71

There would be plenty of fuss and feathers, that much is certain.

I guess what matters is what you expect. If you expect a reasoned debate on the issues, you have to invite reasonable people. If they are raving, you will not get that.

If it is to simply "whack" the raving--watch them get "pwn3d"--well . . . fine, if you think that is entertaining--and it may very well be.

If it is to educate the raving, that will depend on the poster. Those with extreme views tend not to have an interest in discussion, debate, or rethinking their positions. They merely wish to prosletize . . . prosylet . . . preach Whatever is their viewpoint. See any flame war over Creationism, Holocaust Denial, Moon Hoax, 9/11 Tw00fers, and Britany Spears.

So long as you know what your intentions and expectations are.

--J.D.

[SR71]

Originally Posted by Doctor X

[1] I guess what matters is what you expect. If you expect a reasoned debate on the issues, you have to invite reasonable people. If they are raving, you will not get that.

[2] If it is to simply "whack" the raving--watch them get "pwn3d"--well . . . fine, if you think that is entertaining--and it may very well be.

[3] If it is to educate the raving, that will depend on the poster. Those with extreme views tend not to have an interest in discussion, debate, or rethinking their positions. They merely wish to prosletize . . . prosylet . . . preach Whatever is their viewpoint. See any flame war over Creationism, Holocaust Denial, Moon Hoax, 9/11 Tw00fers, and Britany Spears.

So long as you know what your intentions and expectations are.

--J.D.

Thanks Doctor X, this is a fine problem statement and structural analysis of the topic under discussion.

[1] The proposal is to invite the raving variety. Reasoned debate would not be among the possible outcomes. Expectations of any breakthroughs in communication or understanding are near zero. There is a clear binary divide within that user group, the raving and the rational. Certainly I might invite some of the reasonable, there would be no harm in that?

[2] Yes, much whacking of the raving would ensue. It would not convince them of just how raving they really are, however. It would be entertaining and frustrating at once. Counter-whacking by the raving upon the reasoned would also result, ad infinitum.

[3] The case 3 scenario of education is ruled out, based on long term observation of the individuals in question. They are immune to reason. Probability of education equals zero.

I think that these responses to your assessment paint a clear picture of what we might expect if we were to pursue this course of action.

The best case scenario is that they would soon tire of the game, being that there are no moderators to appeal to when they get their feelings hurt, but there are no guarantees this would be the case.

Ambivalence is the word regarding myself. While it would certainly liven the place up, it would also degrade the collegial atmosphere we currently enjoy. I am not inclined to do anything irreversible over the stated objections of fellow members.

PS - Poland? Why Poland?

[Clutch Munny]

Originally Posted by Doctor X

If it is to educate the raving, that will depend on the poster. Those with extreme views tend not to have an interest in discussion, debate, or rethinking their positions.

Yeah, whenever they get pwn3d they might just pretend it never happened and put the pwn3r on ignore. And that's a recipe for being an ignoramus forever!

[Doctor X]

Let me put it this way: as I intimated above, I can find Holocaust Deniers, 9/11 Tw00fers, Creationists, Sharia-Islamofascist Apologist--the "women do great because they just sit at home and get fat" variety--Obama Supporters [Stop that.--Ed.], et cetera. There is no end of complete cranks on Al Gore's interwebz.

To what end?

If it entertains you and others to deal with such--"Are you NOT entertained?!!"--have at it. Just do not expect anything more than the obvious results.

--J.D.

[Crumb]

PS - Poland? Why Poland?

[SR71]

Poland has some loaded meaning... They never see the Pole. Poll/Pole/Poland... or more than that?

[livius drusus]

It started as a George W. Bush reference. Remember in the '04 debate when he was all "DON'T FARGET POLAND LOL" at Kerry when Kerry was talking about the so-called Coalition of the Willing in Iraq? I believe it was Bort who first linked the phrase to polls.

[BrotherMan]

In my defense, I most likely got that from random sources at old IIDB fora. I don't recall whether or not it was a perennial option to polls, but it did appear in enough comments that it got cemented into my broebral bortex.

[Crumb]

I think Bort is engaging in a secret plan to overtake one humorous meme (if you'll pardon my use of the word) at a time. I vote we preemptively ban him.