About Lazario

[memnv]

Just wondering who was attacking who, It looked like you were attacking me

[Raydawggie]

Welcome back, Lazario.

Oh, and Henski, the BBC is only good for domestic news. If you're interested in evenhanded coverage of certain conflicts around the globe, it's about as biased as you get.

I like my news without pro-war propaganda.

So you prefer anti-war propaganda? And I have to say, as an Israeli-American, I find their coverage of the Mideast conflict horribly one-sided.

[memnv]

I like my news without pro-war propaganda.

So you prefer anti-war propaganda? And I have to say, as an Israeli-American, I find their coverage of the Mideast conflict horribly one-sided.

What part of Isreal are you from, I was there in 1981

[idobelieveinfairiesido]

well ive been to work 4 the day come back and all this has happened....after reading all 4 pages i'am non the wiser and still rather confused....

[Raydawggie]

What part of Isreal are you from, I was there in 1981

I was born in America, but my mother grew up in Jerusalem and served in the IDF. My father was of Russian descent.

[memnv]

cool

[Alan]

About Lazario's suspension.

I don't think Lazario should have been suspended. He never blatantly insulted anyone, quite the opposite with memnv. I don't see why Lazario was banned for "talking too much" and providing his view on issues in lengthy, argumentative and well thought out posts.

[Luke]

Alan, this is the second time this week you've bumped an old thread with seemingly no purpose than to create problems. The last one was tastelessly done and this one is simply done with ignorance. Lazario hasn't been banned - he has been suspended for two weeks. And you don't know the reasons behind it, so there's no need to pretend you do or criticize it based on what you think, especially by bumping an old thread to do it publicly. One of the biggest reasons Lazario is currently suspended is because an influx of forum negativity has come from his posts/threads. This seems to be the very thing you are inviting with uninformed posts like the two above.

[memnv]

About Lazario's suspension.

I don't think Lazario should have been suspended. He never blatantly insulted anyone, quite the opposite with memnv. I don't see why Lazario was banned for "talking too much" and providing his view on issues in lengthy, argumentative and well thought out posts.

I also don't think Lazario was trying "to start a fight" (one of the reasons he was banned)

Alan when was the last time I got into it with anyone. probably been over a month, I have even been civil with you and have had conversations, If you look at some of Laz's posts it seems to me he has been trying to start stuff hoping for a fight. He even has jumped on people for spelling his name wrong. I think he was just trying to push Luke and the Mods as far as he could.

Just my opinion

[Alice]

Alan, this is the second time this week you've bumped an old thread with seemingly no purpose than to create problems.

I'm sorry but I just gotta say this: you just got PWNED!

You pissed me off last time, Alan.
I wasn't even talking to you, + did I REALLY Honestly Truly CARE?? (the answer is NO)

One word of advice: don't put your input unless you know what the ..... they are talkin about.
btw: If you HAVE something to say to me SAY IT DIRECTLY TO ME, not in some place where you don't even know if I looked and checked.

and yes, i'm sorry that i am bumping up this old thread........but I just had to say that in case Alan came and looked..........you prefer it that way don't you Alan??

[Lazario]

I'm stepping in to lock this thread, not because anything has been proven definitively. I doubt Lazario or anyone else here ever will, especially when minds are only open as far as sharing thoughts, never to attempt to understand or appreciate other points of view. No, this thread is being closed because it has (surprise, surprise) devolved into a grounds to attack other members, including moderators who are trying to uphold our basic rules on civility. As this goes against the original intention (which I believe was merely to again get on a soapbox and ruffle some feathers, the latter inevitably leading to heated personal attacks) and gives the forum a negative air many try so hard to avoid, there's little reason for it to stay open and prolong chaos.

It's a thread like this which leads me to believe no political discussion can remain civil on this forum, which is probably true of most heated political discussions off the forum. Here, they devolve into name-calling and semantics over words, as if everyone makes a concerted effort to reiterate their same points rather than debating an argument. I suppose when an initial post seems tailored to trigger heated remarks rather than genuinely open discussion and sets the tone for a thread where earnest remarks will be met with line-by-line putdowns, that is fairly inevitable.

Anyone is welcome to try similar discussion and see if it can remain civil, but I think Lazario is probably approaching his hot topic quota for February, so someone else may wish to do this.

Y'know, no one ever listens when I say I'm not trying to start any fights. You included. So people keep saying it... I don't think they're interested in the truth. Everyone wants to keep going on and on about how much trouble I cause - what do they have to gain in the misinterpretation? So I'm not the 'nicest' guy in the world. Sometimes when you disagree with me, hey - you are wrong. Just because people get the impression that I feel I always have to be right does not mean I'm always wrong.

When you get into a conversation with someone, you have a responsibility to do 1 thing - don't be stupid. Or selfish. That's 2 things. And when you get into a conversation with me, you have no right to be arrogant - which every other dork is thinking that's an effective way to converse with me. It's not when I'm the one who's really concerned with the people who are being effected the most. I have the real problems and issues at mind in 'controversial' conversations. And you're right to think I have a low tolerance for people being glib or smug or snotty about human rights.

Just keep that in mind when you get into a conversation with me. Don't whine about anything else - stick to the damn subject and don't just think about yourself - unless you want to spread insight. Abortion, gay rights, the Republican war on progressive American values - not things I respond to arrogant people well on - I dish out the harshness with people who don't care. That just happens to include "proud", Republican-voting American citizens who care about freedom so long as it's their freedom to be selfish.

Sorry I ruffled your feathers - but I expect people to cop attitudes for the right reasons.

[Luke]

This is not a thread to continue that other discussion that has been closed. If you want to use it for that, this one can get closed too. For the record, my feathers were not ruffled. In fact, it's nice to have some serious discussion on this forum, but without moderation, it basically enables any one individual to effectively turn the Off-Topic forum into a boundless place for hate.

[Lazario]

but without moderation, it basically enables any one individual to effectively turn the Off-Topic forum into a boundless place for hate.

I understand your point and your position.

I guess people here don't understand a lot about me. It's not that I'm always right, I've just already considered everything relavent to the issue - whatever issue it is. You see it depending upon how far I continue to discuss. There are a million things I know nothing about and therefore, I don't talk about everything. But I know a lot more about what I'm talking about than people give me credit for. And my points / view will not be pushed around just because some selfish people can't handle it. I see too many people are not interested in the truth, and only expect to hear what they want. When they don't get their way, they attack me. Not the other way around.

To be crude, there's no hate in my game. I mean, I start by telling the truth, not trying to soften it up. That's when people get bugged, because they don't want to be reminded that they are not the only people around. Take a real good look at the discussions and this will hit you like a hammer.

I'm not worried about what people think of me. I will only try to defend myself, that's it. I'm still the minority here so if you try, you'll understand why I feel like I have to be defensive.

And as far as this topic is concerned, it's about me - so regardless of who started it, I have the say over what is discussed. Unless you want me to remind you of the time when memnv decided he controlled what was said about him... How quickly you people forget - any time it's convenient, right. If the rule applies to him, it applies to me as well.

Oh yeah, and about that comment, another thing - some people here already don't like me. Whatever you do, don't look at how quickly dvdjunkie and thomashton got on my case about cracking jokes refering to Dick Cheney, in a post marked "VP Dick Cheney..." Maybe I'm not joking when I say people here start things just as quickly as I'm claimed to. All I ask is the benefit of the doubt, not to be held accountable for what other people say of me - but rather for the things I've tried to do. And it's hard to accept, but I've only tried to do good. It's hard to keep things 'in-hand' when I'm being attacked. In fact, I'm hardly the only one here on hyper-defense!

[memnv]

lol thats funny

[Lazario]

Is it?

I hereby RECAST you in my Alice in Wonderland cast as the Sweeping Dog with BrushTail.

[memnv]

whatever

[Lazario]

I don't really mean that. I'd have to go back to the post and change it... Too much work involved.

[deathie mouse]

Ay Lazario, Iohannes baptista est nomen eius a voice crying in the wilderness

[Fflewduur]

...I've just already considered everything relavent {sic} to the issue - whatever issue it is.

If that statement were made with anyone else's name beneath it--

would you consider it arrogant?