Comments for Stories that Deserve the Cyberspace Wastebasket »
Posted By Spadecaller 10 months ago in Political NewsIn their quest to blame Obama for everything, PC25 and a few others post bogus stories to provide cheap and worthless entertainment on Propeller . So why do members who despise these articles of false propaganda promote them to the front page?
Is it that we are too weak and cannot resist the spectacle of pelting our most hated members with our noble swords of righteous indignation? Is it virtue that drives us to prop this trash and to pelt these morons with our love of decency and truth? Do we get a misshapen pleasure out of punishing these misguided messengers with our great wit and abounding knowledge? Are these questions worthy of our consideration?
Read Full Story at freewebs.com »
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 612
-
56%
Spadecaller10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
PC25 and his kind would soon slither into obscurity, where they belong, if members on Propeller would boycott their trashy stories. Would that be such a grave sacrifice? Are we afraid that our odd attraction to this lowlife form of entertainment would disappear? Are we willing to be honest about their value and our part in promoting this crap? Can we do better?
Reply-
89%
tehranchik10 months ago
-
59%
Spadecaller10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
tehranchik:
Reply
Perhaps you should first familiarize yourself with PC-25's stories. There is one now taking the lead position on the front page.
Take a look at this article and it will give you a good idea what I am attempting to address:
http://www.propeller.com/story/2009/01/07/the-trut...
Tehranchik:
Post some false stories that have no basis in reality and let the community judge for itself. I have no power; I am just one individual. What is there to fear if you have nothing to hide?
If one wants to fabricate lies and post stories that have no basis in reality, they should not be surprised that some of us may choose to boycott their submissions when they are just scurrilous and rumor mongering attacks without validity.
When OJ Simpson was going to publish his latest book and Fox started to promote it, TV viewers took an unprecedented stand against FOX. They boycotted the station. This resulted in FOX dropping Simpson's trashy book.
The idea that a group can stand up against the press when it abuses the principles of fair play and honesty is a healthy thing, in my opinion.-
-
-
PsychoHosebeastComment removed: Spammer, Abusive
-
-
libsRfunnyComment removed: Hard Banned15 Replies
-
75%
GehlLady10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Spadecaller,
Reply
First I have to say I didn't listen to the whole story, I would have preferred text as I'm listening to music. I read through all the comments before I post my comment. I know I'm relatively new here, and may not understand how all of this works, but..........
First it was Hyper, and now this. To name pc25 is one thing. To add "and a few others", is something else.
If pc25, and the others, had written the articles he posts,or he had called you out by name, I may have been able to understand this attack from you. I'm not in any way defending the content of his submissions, only his right to post them, and generate whatever comments and ratings come his way. What this attack feels like to me is an attempt by you to control the content, comments, and rating of an open, public, discussion board. I have every hope that all of your opinions of Obama are correct, but for you to go to this extent to revile those that have a different opinion, does not give me confidence in your opinions. I would give much greater weight to a specific reference to information, a link, something for me to follow up on from you or anyone else that disagreed with a specific article of his in the comment section. Point/counterpoint. Debunked? Or not?
I can understand Klarissas comments here. She is usually named right after pc25, and she has taken a huge amount of heat, regardless of what she says, on most threads I have seen her on. I personally have rarely seen her be as short tempered as her comment to you in my short time here, but I'm sure she took this submission personally. I don't blame her. I get called out, (last time by Goppy) and sometimes I get cranky, sometimes it's just fun to yank his chain.
If you had PM'd your friends, started a conversation in your groups, I wouldn't have had this reaction. But this is, as Tehranchik said, makes me wonder, when will it be my turn? Or was I "one of the few"?-
mntnman444Comment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned9 Replies
-
88%
HannibalBarca10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Myself, I think you are one of the few, you have your views and state them, and do make valid comments...but as I said you are one of the few
Reply
Besides, I have worked in the mud for years ; so slinging it does have a certain pleasure, and pc.25's articles brings out the trolls as targets
-
-
-
56%
Spadecaller10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
tehranchik:
Reply
In addition to PC-25, I am sure you must have some experience with stories that are completely false, stories that are based on blatant lies, which result in foolish and immature exchanges. Have you propped stories that do not deserve promotion?
Perhaps you are among the saintly ones on Propeller... But, for the rest of us, who have fallen into the spell of these trashy stories, there might be something here to consider that is of value. Is that a possibility?
Have you ever found yourself sucked into the mudslinging contests? Are you willing to be honest about yourself instead of blaming me for scaring you?-
-
-
-
-
78%
CaptainLucid10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Also, Why does everyone from Biden to Spadecaller feel they have to apologies for Obama before anythings happened or he's even taken office."
Reply
I feel the need to apologize for Obama because the republicans were about to reform the whole market but then sneaky Obama pulled the messiah card and told them that he had special permission to overrule a presidential veto or a 2/3 vote as long as it was about keeping the fraud going past the 20th. Obama let W down and now W has to try to come up with nonsense for a few more weeks when he is too busy trying to talk about his swift response to Katrina and 9/11..-
80%
dunkirk10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
ROFLMAO, Id say you need to cut back on the meds a little. Altho I guess we did elect the right person for the job. It appears he was able to influence legislation before he was even elected and poor old McLame was just floundering about unable to add or help in the crisis.
Reply
-
-
-
mntnman444Comment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned
-
-
-
97%
tehranchik10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I guess I look at the promotion differently than you do. I think some of the promotion, for me anyway, is used to get something into the light - debunk if possible. I have voted several articles and shared with friends for exactly this reason - debunking.
Reply
Saintly - I don't think so. The halo doesn't fit. My history of props and comments is open for anyone to see. I'm sure there is sarcasm, cynicism and snarkiness galore. I think when something is untrue - we have to show it's untrue.
Lastly it's the idea of trying to control what someone else does is impossible. We can only control ourselves. I agree that blindly voting articles is an aggravation. I'm powerless to have any say in what users decide to do.
I'm late for work - I'll check in later.-
100%
aceofspades110 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I agree with you tehranchik - I often prop outlandish & false articles if only to bring them into the light & keep them there for others to see the rancid ideas of some on Propeller. The comments posted about these articles also gives me some insight into the mindset of those commenting upon them, very often people reveal themselves in their comments to be completely different than I have been lead to believe they are. Let the light shine upon these maleficent postings just as turning on the light shows where the cockroaches lurk.
Reply -
68%
rightfromwrong10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
pc25...his attitude is that if he throws enough crap on the wall there is always idiots with an I.Q. of 91 or leas like George W. who can't disseminate the information, so therefore some of it will stick.
Reply
Other imbeciles who work on behalf are Klarissa,Redriver and Endomorph...all of these must be paid by the right wing because they likely couldn't get jobs as Walmart greeters-
29%
Bucotch10 months ago
-
-
89%
CaptainLucid10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
http://www.ebaumsworld.com/pictures/view/1469/
Reply
Hey Bucotch, looking good in your walmart uniform. -
88%
ybdogsct10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
BUCOTCH :
Reply
"Walmart greeters have Obama voters beat in the I.Q. department."
Actually, the opposite is true. Liberals tend to outperform conservatives academically by a significant margin.
Spin this.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/106381/Obama-Education-...
"Barack Obama leads John McCain by a significant margin among voters with the most education. McCain leads Obama among those with the least education. Thus, it appears that Obama's strong showing among educated voters in the Democratic nomination contest would extend to the general election as well."
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2006/pages/results/sta...
"College graduates are more likely to vote Democrat than Republican by a 53% to 46% margin. Those with postgraduate degrees are more likely to vote Democrat than Republican by a 58% to 41% margin."
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcg...
"U.S. medical students are considerably more likely to be liberal than conservative and are more likely to be liberal than are other young U.S. adults. Among these medical students, 5% self-characterized as politically very conservative, 21% conservative, 31% liberal, and 9% as very liberal.”
http://www.local6.com/education/2540402/detail.htm...
http://www.alec.org/am/pdf/2007_ALEC_Education_Rep...
Of the top 5 states with the HIGHEST academic achievement, 4 vote DEMOCRATIC (Minnesota, Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire). Of the bottom 10 states with the WORST academic achievement, 7 vote REPUBLICAN (Mississippi, Alabama, Louisiana, West Virginia, Arkansas, Georgia, South Carolina).
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/departments/elearnin...
Of the top 5 "SMARTEST STATES," 4 vote DEMOCRATIC (Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey). Of the 10 "DUMBEST STATES," 8 vote REPUBLICAN (West Virginia, Kentucky, Mississippi, Arkansas, Alabama, Louisiana, Tennessee, Oklahoma).
As far as the topic of this thread is concerned, I believe everyone, including PC25, should be able to post their own articles.
However, I also believe that like-minded users, like Spadecaller, also have the right to organize and boycott threads that peddle falsehoods.
It goes both ways.-
78%
CaptainLucid10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
My personal favorite stat is when you look at how much more money dem states put into the federal piggie bank compared to how much republican states like the south suck out. In the south they should pledge alligence to the United States of California because we pretty much balance their budgets by ourselves. The difference between the south and mexico is the south has access to Californian money and loves to tell us how much they hate our morals and how evil we are while they take our money. It really burns me knowing the south won the civil war because we didn't let them seccede. I also like putting a protractor point on W's ranchette and drawing a circle that just misses the west coast, the great lakes and the northeast in other words a circle that is centered in texas but doesn't include any states that matter.
Reply -
RRconComment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned11 Replies
-
-
-
71%
slate10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Ah is this what you had hoped for Spade? The name calling like school kids, the IQ jokes and the making of 'lists' of those that shouldn't be 'allowed' their point of view?
Reply
Marcus, once again, I implore you to reinstate the member blocking function, it will ease people feeling the need for these types of 'campaigns against free speech'.-
73%
mesodude10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Ah is this what you had hoped for Spade? The name calling like school kids, the IQ jokes and the making of 'lists' of those that shouldn't be 'allowed' their point of view?"
Reply
--Who said anything about silencing anyone's point of view? I don't see where Spade says this anywhere. Post to you heart's content but why pollute the site with your personal crusade against Obama (or anyone) and in a way that is clearly not meant to foster legitimate debate? Just as Propeller encourages users to keep their comments relevant to the story I see no reason why users shouldn't be *discouraged* from flooding the front page with the equivalent of tidbits from the National Enquirer.
A boycott isn't censorship, slate. You have a right to mindlessly promote crap stories and we have a right to boycott them.-
75%
slate10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I dunno Messo, I've witnessed much pollution from the left of Bush and every other person on the right. Fair is fair is it not?
Reply
Besides, Spade could have accomplished this very easily using PMs to those in his group and have others of like mind contact those in their groups of friends.
Boycott all you want, making a thread to attack a member personally is snaky at best. -
33%
CajunChamp10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
My take on what Slate meant is that, count 'em, how many replies are actually on-topic in direct response to the main topic as posted as opposed to the name calling, personal attacks and singling out others as (insert hate-stuff here). What has transpired here in this thread is exactly the same that Spade alludes that is being posted by pc25 and others. C'mon ... over 400 replies and ALL on-topic?
Reply
-
-
-
54%
CactusAnnie10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Spadecaller is in blatant violation of the terms of use with this personal attack on one of my favorite posters, and it is not the first time.
Reply
8. Your Responsibilities.
You may use Propeller.com for lawful purposes only. You may not submit, offer links from, or transmit through Propeller.com any material, or otherwise engage in any conduct that:
VIOLATES OR INFRINGES THE RIGHTS OF OTHERS including, without limitation, patent, trademark, trade secret, copyright, publicity or other proprietary rights; is unlawful, THREATENING, ABUSIVE, HARASSING DEFAMATORY LIBELOUS, deceptive, fraudulent, obscene, pornographic, invasive of another's privacy, TORTIOUS, or contains explicit or graphic descriptions, or accounts of, sexual acts;
victimizes, harasses, degrades, or intimidates an individual or group of individuals on the basis of religion, gender, sexual orientation, race, ethnicity, age, or disability;
impersonates any person, business or entity, including our employees and agents;
contains viruses or any other computer code, files or programs that interrupt, destroy or limit the functionality of any computer software or hardware or telecommunications equipment, or otherwise permit the unauthorized use of a computer or computer network;
encourages conduct that would constitute a criminal offense, or that gives rise to civil liability;
offers, promotes or encourages betting or wagering prohibited by law;
violates these Terms of Use, guidelines or any policy posted on Propeller.com, or
interferes with the use of Propeller.com by others.
You may not use Propeller.com in a way that could damage or impair our servers or networks. You may not interfere with any other party's use and enjoyment of Propeller.com. You may not attempt to gain unauthorized access to our services, user accounts, computer systems or networks. We may take any legal and technical remedies to prevent the violation of these Terms of Use.-
70%
HannibalBarca10 months ago
-
-
75%
HannibalBarca10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
And of course, rrcon personal threats to me are acceptable in your eyes as he is a con, so I deserve it right?
Reply
Any poster that negs me because I stated that I lost a twin with our first pregnancy or another implies the surviving one will do him for $5 will not get a pleasant word from me.
Big difference between us is I insult them, not their family or country, and these are your friends.
So your quest about spade and rules falls short in my eyes-
100%
CactusAnnie10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Bullcorn! You insult the USA constantly, and you don't even know what you are talking about half the time.
Reply
I didn't see the neg about your loss, there was probably something else in there that he was negging, but like I said, I didn't see it.
I have seen you go around stalking and baiting certain posters around here for a long time. You are relentless. You would do well to invite RRcon out for a beer when the spring thaw comes instead of constantly harassing him...
For your information, there is no quest, that is the sort of thing SC does. I was just pointing out the fact of the situation.
However I might fall in your eyes, is of no particular interest to me.
I do wish you warmth though, I am sure you need it where you are...-
25%
HannibalBarca10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Wrong again, I give what i get, and as I said those who insult my family get what they deserve.
Reply
And never have I insulted USA, just your WH policies
Find any comment on me insulting USA,,,,you can't
And as for me stalking,,,,that troll can report me
-
-
-
-
100%
LegalBob10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Calling for a general boycott is fine. Naming someone as " .... and his kind ..." is getting a bit personal and on the edge. Nothing illegal but at the same time, not warranted. He could have justly mentioned " ... and articles such as PC25 posts" with linked references. It was a personal attack, veiled yes, and craftily written.
Reply
-
-
69%
ybdogsct10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
CACTUSANNIE :
Reply
"Spadecaller is in blatant violation of the terms of use with this personal attack on one of my favorite posters, and it is not the first time..."
Once again, CACTUSANNIE unsurprisingly misses the mark.
Did you bother to listen to the entire link in full?
The speech was NOT directed at PC25 at all. The speech was addressed to "mainstream centrist and liberal members of Propeller." SPADECALLER is not calling for censorship, neither is he "threatening" or "violating" PC25's rights. In fact, I'm sure he is fully aware that as a regular member, he doesn't have the permissions necessary to delete PC25's posts and threads.
No, SPADECALLER's speech was addressed to "mainstream centrist and liberal members of Propeller" because it is calling for such like-minded members to exercise restraint when encountering an article filled with apparent falsehoods. In other words, don't just Prop every story that is sent to your mailbox. Read the article, evaluate its veracity and value, and then make the decision to Prop and/or comment.
SPADECALLER is not censoring, removing offending threads, deleting posts, or banning members.
SPADECALLER is not threatening PC25. In fact, his speech is not even addressed to PC25.
SPADECALLER is not threatening members to Prop only his approved stories.
Spadecaller is simply asking members to exercise some discretion.
Furthermore, this is a private forum, not a public space. It is neither your place to interpret the TOU, nor is it your place to determine whether the TOU has been violated. So your futile appeal to Propeller's TOU is just that -- futile.
LOL.-
78%
Spadecaller10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Thanks for clarifying that point, ybdogsct. This short address was an appeal to the mainstream,centrist, and liberal members to exercise discretion in propping stories and to consider boycotting those that are based on lies and rumors. I believe that will benefit our community and improve the quality of debate.
Reply -
100%
LegalBob10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
First line:
Reply
"In their quest to blame Obama for everything, PC25 and a few others "
First line of Spade's discussion:
"PC25 and his kind would soon slither into obscurity, where they belong,"
I would really like you, et al, on the witness stand. You wouldn't stand a chance.
Yes, I agree with the premis of the article but not singling out a particular individual. The article could have just as much impact without mentioning PC25, IMHO of course.
Good idea, Spade, but it won't fly.-
40%
ybdogsct10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
LEGALBOB:
Reply
"Yes, I agree with the premis of the article but not singling out a particular individual."
There is nothing in the TOU that prevents members from referring to other individual member. The issue is whether or not Spadecaller was "threatening" PC25 with a personal attack. It was NOT a "threat" since the speech was not even directed at PC25, but rather to the "mainstream centrist and liberal members of Propeller."
Was the speech preachy? Yes.
Proselytizing? Yes.
A little "holier than though"? Sure, why not.
But there's nothing in the TOU that prohibits that. If there were, a number of the "Moral Majority" here on Propeller would have been banned quite a long time ago.
But the speech can't be construed as a "threat" if its not directed at PC25, even though it singles PC25 by name as a prime example of a member whose threads lack credibility and value.
If you claim Spadecaller is "threatening" PC25, then what exactly is Spadecaller threatening him with? Deletion of threads, deletion of posts, revocation of forum membership? No, I don't hear that anywhere in Spadecaller's speech. Besides, I'm fairly certain Spadecaller realizes he doesn't possess the necessary permissions to delete threads, remove posts, and ban members; if he did have these website permissions, Spadecaller wouldn't have had to create this thread.
If you have a sound argument, then by all means put me on the witness stand and present it. You certainly haven't impressed me thus far. Although as I stated earlier, this is a private forum, not a public space so your interpretation of the TOU means squat, but I'll certainly give you the opportunity to bloviate, if you wish.-
100%
LegalBob10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Gee, you sure add things to replies that don't exist. I did not SAY or mean that it was against the TOU. I did not SAY he was "threatening" anyone or even hint as such. When he said "PC25 and his kind" is where he stepped close to the line of personal attack no matter what the TOU says and the TOU doesn't even enter in to it from my standpoint, mine is a personal assessment.
Reply
Also, sorry but this IS a public forum and not even on a private server. It's only considered private if you need a login and password to POST, not just READ. Some sites that ARE on an individual or company private server may not need to register, etc.
Whether or not you're "impressed" means diddly squat. Reading comprehension lessons should be considered in your immediate future.-
50%
ybdogsct10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
LEGALBOB :
Reply
'If anonymous individuals can come here and READ the submissions then it's a PUBLIC venue, simple as that."
We are NOT talking about "anonymous individuals. We are discussing Spadecaller and PC25, two REGISTERED members.
Why is this so difficult for you to understand?
LEGALBOB :
"My point is "everybody" can post here, therefore it is a pubic access server."
Wrong.
Firstly, only REGISTERED members can post here. Users have been banned before without warning and they can be banned again. Likewise, spammer accounts and sock-puppet accounts are prevented from posting once they've been discovered. Not "everyone" can post here. Only registered members who have agreed to accept the TOU can post in the forums.
Secondly, you are changing terms to fit your altered reality. NOBODY is arguing whether Propeller exists on a public access server. The argument is whether or not the Propeller website is considered private property. If it is, AOL has full leverage to deny membership to anyone they deem unacceptable.
Get this through your thick head: Propeller is a private, for-profit venture. AOL reaps the generated revenue. AOL alone determines how to interpret/enforce its TOU. AOL determines whether to expunge threads, delete posts, and ban members. All the content on this website is the property of AOL. Period.
If you don't like it, tough. Like any membership club, the website belongs to AOL, and AOL makes the rules.
The fact you keep changing your story reveals just how tenuous your pathetic argument is.
LEGALBOB:
"Another example: You have an office. The boss chews you out in the middle of the office where all the employees can hear but they can't comment. OR the boss takes you into his office and closes the door and chews you out and invites your immediate supervisor in. Can you relate that to Private and Public?"
Actually, you had to click a link to enter this thread and even then you only were exposed to a snippet. In order to hear the full recording, you had to click another link to enter Spadecaller's personal website. Spadecaller's opinions certainly weren't imposed on your virgin ears. If you didn't want to hear what Spadecaller had to say, then perhaps you shouldn't have followed the TWO LINKS you voluntarily clicked.
A better characterization of what happened is this: Spadecaller invited all the Friends on his Friends List into a room to warn them about dubious stories PC25 was posting. You decided to enter not just the house (i.e., clicked the 1st link to enter the thread), but also decided to enter the very room where Spadecaller's friends were gathering (i.e., clicked the 2nd link to the recording on Spadecaller's personal website).
Spadecaller's tirade was not imposed upon you. Nobody forced you to follow those two links to Spadecaller's personal website.
As I said before, if you think you have a case, then why don't you put your money where your mouth is. File a suit for slander.
Go ahead.
Let's see just how strong your courage in your convictions is.
LOL. -
50%
ybdogsct10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
LEGALBOB:
Reply
"When he said "PC25 and his kind" is where he stepped close to the line of personal attack no matter what the TOU says and the TOU doesn't even enter in to it from my standpoint, mine is a personal assessment."
Let me explain it simple terms so that even a simpleminded fool like you can understand.
You claim Spadecaller "personally attacked" PC25.
How? From a post that wasn't even addressed to PC25, but instead was addressed to the "mainstream centrist and liberal members of Propeller"? Can you demonstrate losses or damages PC25 suffered in this alleged attack?
Go ahead and sue for slander, if you think you have a case. Put your money where your mouth is.
LOL.
There's a profound difference between a personal attack and a call-to-action. This speech addressed to the "mainstream centrist and liberal members of Propeller" was a call-to-action.
LEGALBOB:
"Also, sorry but this IS a public forum and not even on a private server. It's only considered private if you need a login and password to POST, not just READ. Some sites that ARE on an individual or company private server may not need to register, etc."
Wrong.
This forum is private property owned by AOL. As such, the moderators are free to interpret the TOU, remove threads, delete posts, and even ban members as they see fit. This website is private property and any revenue generated by it goes to AOL's coffers. Period. If you don't like how AOL's moderators interpret the TOU, you don't have to participate.
I suggest you learn the difference, or return to your law books. Either you failed to learn it the first time, or your school was subpar. I would have expected more from someone who "claims" to possess a JD.
Pathetic.-
100%
LegalBob10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"mine is a personal assessment". Any idea what that means? Opinion maybe??!!
Reply
Public/Private .. you have no clue as to what that means. To you, every server that is owned by an individual or company is a "private" server. Maybe I should make things a little simpler for you to understand. The fact that it is a "private" server owned by AOL has no bearing. If anonymous individuals can come here and READ the submissions then it's a PUBLIC venue, simple as that. If you post, nobody knows who you are other than the AOL folks when you register after which you can post with your handle which the PUBLIC reading your post has no idea who you really are. If the PUBLIC has no access to READ or to POST then that is a "Private" venue. I am not disputing the difference between privately owned and "public" access. My point is "everybody" can post here, therefore it is a pubic access server. I suggest you learn a bit more about the difference. When I was in law school there were no PC's or Internet.
Another example: You have an office. The boss chews you out in the middle of the office where all the employees can hear but they can't comment. OR the boss takes you into his office and closes the door and chews you out and invites your immediate supervisor in. Can you relate that to Private and Public?
Some ancient philosopher had it right:
He who knows and knows that he knows is a teacher, follow him
He who knows not and knows that he knows not, is simple, teach him.
He who knows not and knows not the knows not is a fool, shun him.
With that in mind, see ya.-
100%
LegalBob10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Ok then, let's get on the same page.
Reply
Propeller is hosted on a privately owned server (AOL) but is publicly accessible. Anybody can READ and anybody can POST (yes, registration necessary).
You said:
" Although as I stated earlier, this is a private forum, not a public space so your interpretation of the TOU means squat"
The "this is a private forum" is what I took/take issue with. It is NOT a "private forum", anyone can partake. Having to register to post does not make it a private forum as ANYone can register, even Valerie Putin.
And I was/am not interpreting the TOU but rather voicing my own opinion as I previously stated.
Summary: Private server, by definition, yes owned by AOL. Private forum, no, anyone can use it.-
50%
ybdogsct10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
LEGALBOB:
Reply
"Private server, by definition, yes owned by AOL. Private forum, no, anyone can use it."
We differ in our definition of "use." Anyone can read the forum, yes. But not everyone (only registered members) can post messages. Likewise not everyone (only those who voluntarily agree to abide by AOL's TOU) can become a member. I define "use" to mean one can enjoy the full privileges of everything the website has to offer.
Furthermore, your office analogy earlier is invalid. Just because everyone can read the forum does not mean that its contents are in any way imposed upon you the public. Nobody forced you to listen to Spadecaller's rant -- you had to click the first link to enter this thread just to see the excerpt and then had to click a second link to be transferred to Spadecaller's personal website to listen to the entire recording in full. Even once you arrived at Spadecaller's website, his speech wasn't imposed upon you since you were free to close your web browser at ANY time.
I posted this earlier, but I'll post it again here for emphasis: You wrote earlier
LEGALBOB :
"Another example: You have an office. The boss chews you out in the middle of the office where all the employees can hear but they can't comment. OR the boss takes you into his office and closes the door and chews you out and invites your immediate supervisor in. Can you relate that to Private and Public?"
But that's not what happened here. What happened here was more like this.
A better example: Spadecaller invites Friends on his Friends List to his room to warn them of PC25's dubious articles. You not only enter the house (click the 1st link to enter the thread), but also enter the very room in which Spadecaller's friends have gathered (click the 2nd link to enter Spadecaller's personal website). And then you have the nerve to complain that Spadecaller's speech, which exists on his private, personal website, was imposed upon you the public.
Your description is simply not an accurate account of what transpired. Only interested parties would have followed both links, which were CLEARLY LABELED AND NOT MISLEADING IN THEIR CONTENT .-
100%
MotiGui10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I was an anonymous public user when I typed in the propeller.com address and the very first submission was this one. I was not invited in to anyone's private domain, their house or their private web site. I understand if Spadecaller has a web site and he posts content. I can either read it or not. But that's not a private space either unless it is not publicy available and the only way you can get there is if someone gives you the URL and access information. After that, caveat emptor. Propeller, by contrast is not anyone's private domain, anyone in the public arena can come here, read posts and reply (if they register) but they are still in the public domain, the exception being is that now they can post. In reality we are ALL in the public domain, you don't know who I am and vice-versa.
Reply
My take is that you guys are talking about two very different things. There is a difference between a privately owned server, a private or public forum, a private or public website, etc. Private means just that, not accessible to the public to read OR to post. If Spadecaller's web site is able to be Googled then it's not a private web site. Lets say I type PC25 in the Google box and Spadecaller's site comes up, the first page being a login page in order to proceed to the message page(s). That would then be a "private" web site. If the message page in question pops up first then it's not private. Anyway, your take on "Bob" is not correct. He said right off that it was his own personal assessment which means "opinion" where I hail from.-
25%
ybdogsct10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
MOTIGUI:
Reply
"If Spadecaller's web site is able to be Googled then it's not a private web site. Lets say I type PC25 in the Google box and Spadecaller's site comes up, the first page being a login page in order to proceed to the message page(s). That would then be a "private" web site."
This would never happen. If you type "PC25" in the Google search engine, it will search for websites that contain the words "PC25" and then display the websites in order from most cross-referenced to least cross-referenced.
But the word "PC25" does not exist on Spadecaller's personal webpage. It's an audio recording . So, no Spadecaller's webpage would not have shown up as a Google hit.
But don't take my word for it. Try it yourself. Type the words below (without quotation marks) into the Google search engine.
"Spadecaller PC25 site:www.freewebs.com"
Let me know how many hits you get.-
100%
LegalBob10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Cripes man, it's a loaded question, you already know the answer. You're missing the point. MotiGui posted an IF example. Yes, we all know it's an unknown web site per se and it can't be Googled, that's a given, but if someone posts the URL anyone can view it without a login which still does not make it a private web site unless you DO have to have a user/pass access. I have private web sites that nobody can view unless you have a user/pass even IF you have the URL, THAT is private. You're mis-applying "private" in this scenario.
Reply
The point that you're missing is that this forum is not private, the server is privately owned. This is a public forum that anyone can access and read posts. Like the staff guy said, posting/replying is RESTRICTED to REGISTERED users. That does NOT make this a private forum. Actually and more accurately this is a "restricted public forum". Let's just put a period on this and if you still don't get it then we'll simply agree to disagree. This submission is not even on the front page any longer, so all this is really moot now.-
0%
ybdogsct10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
We've been talking past each other instead of to each other. You've been talking about the difference between the public sphere and private sphere. I've been talking about the difference between public and private property (Perhaps, I should have inserted the word "privately-owned forum" in place of "private forum" to avoid confusion. Fine. Whatever. The salient point is that AOL establishes its TOU, is solely responsible for interpreting the TOU, and can revoke membership as they see fit.
Reply
But what's your point?
You still haven't demonstrated that Spadecaller's speech was anything more than a call-to-action addressed specifically to the "mainstream centrist and liberal members of Propeller." If you didn't want to hear what Spadecaller had to say, you shouldn't have accepted the invitation to visit Spadecaller's personal website. It's not like Spadecaller's link attempted to mislead you into visiting Spadecaller's personal website.-
100%
LegalBob10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
First paragraph:
Reply
Ok, once more .... My initial comment had nothing to do with the TOU or Spadecallers website and still doesn't. My statement was, as I mentioned to begin with, my personal assessement centering on Spadecaller's perceived personal attack on PC25 in the way he worded his first post and the introduction. That's it, nothing else, until you brought up private forum, of which I took issue and attempted to explain "private" and "restricted", etc. ad nauseum after which you proceeded way off into left field with accusations, name calling, doubting credentials and so on. Where in hell you got all that stuff escapes me..
Second paragraph:
I have/had no interest in his website, has nothing to do with anything regarding my personal assessment.
I have nothing against Spadecaller, it was only the way that PC25 was mentioned in the beginning, that's it. I didn't accept a personal invitation and I didn't visit the website, I have no interest in the site, only the difference between private and public in order to debate that issue that you brought up.
Have a nice day ....-
ybdogsctComment removed: Spam
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
100%
JayGarcia10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Let me clarify the last sentence a bit. The forum is open to the public to read and to post (restricted to registered users). That fact does not make the Propeller forums private forums. Private forums are those that the public cannot see or post to unless they have the necessary login criteria available.
Reply
My UFAQ - www.ufaq.org - is a good example. I own the server which makes it a privately owned machine. The FAQS are there for everyone to read. The fora are there for everyone to read. If you want to post or reply you have to register. I also have 6 forums that are there for programming staff that are private, the public - registered or not - cannot see these, only the members that have the necessary login information. -
-
-
-
-
-
-
50%
Klarissa10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
right - I think that you forgot about the subject.
Reply
Your personal attacks are a reflection on you, not on your victims.
You are the only one who controls what you write - If someone had written this about you, how would you feel - for example,
"Rightfromwrong must be paid by the democratunderground, because he likely couldn't get a job as Walmart greeter. -
-
100%
GLee10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I must agree Chik. This story in particular tops the list of Spadecaller's so called "trash" but will he be 'called out' by the Propeller Scouts for 'calling out' a respected fellow Propeller member, PC25? How dare Spadecaller for attempting to silence any voice on Propeller. This site is what America is all about. Different 'voices' with different opinions. What a shame! AND yes, just who is next on 'Callers list?
Reply -
-
-
78%
mesodude10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"I think some of the promotion, for me anyway, is used to get something into the light - debunk if possible."
Reply
---tehranchik, I have actually given my share of props to stories from those on the right for that very reason but more often than not it's not long into the thread that I realize the poster has no intent whatsoever to actually discuss the subject in any kind of intelligent or meaningful way. Here's how a typical exchange goes:
MR RIGHT: Obama's doing a terrible job. He sucks and ACORN is reeeally bad.
MESO: I think Inauguration Day is later this month but anyway, what criteria are you using?
MR RIGHT: What's criteria mean? Your dumb and your such an elitist.
MESO: Ok...Getting back to the topic, why do you think Obama will destroy the country?
MR RIGHT: Because he sat in that dang pew for 50 years and listened to Rev Wright. Also he's just a socialist who wants to raise my taxes and create big government and kill babies and next thing you know black people will be asking for reparations. Plus his birth certificate was a forgery.
MESO: I see... ;-x-
-
100%
CaptainLucid10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I am not as polite as Meso. I would rip someone a new hole if they tried to pass that on my watch. If you know what Acorn refers to and what the lending law really stated about making loans to blacklisted neighborhoods you get a free pass for awhile. So far the prize sits unclaimed.
Reply -
Neutral
Radiofreeeuropa10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
People should understand that reading a story gives it a higher rank.
Reply
Commenting higher still.
Commenting more -higher still.
"proping" higher still.
I think many are missing the point of Spadecaller's piece.
I am embarrassed sometimes when stories of obvious untruth or extremely poorly written ad-farms are voted up to number 1 on the front page. It makes our community look bad. (Or at least wacky).
I don't see why anyone would vote for a story that they found of poor quality.
Commenting, yes I understand.
I see voting as recommendation.
I often look at stories the people I respect have propped and if it's a picture of someone's cat, or a KKK blog, or some blathering by someone incapable of stringing more than 2 syllables together, I feel their honor is tarnished a bit.
There should be no censorship of course, submit what you wish, but as responsible citizens of the virtual community I hope people will only vote-recommend stories of honest interest . If it's brown..flush it down.
those were theses Martin Luther put on the front door. Not feces!
Now if you think it's good, interesting, or important ,vote.
If it's roadapples, commenting raises it's ranking enough, for goodness sake don't give it credibility. There is a contingent of laughable goosestepping nazis and KKK members fouling the same dimwitted garbage threads over and over...I for one learned there is no point reasoning with them or communicating with them as that would be less fruitful than reasoning with a slug.
This has absolutely nothing to do with politics as there are plenty of reasonably intelligent members of all political stripes who I enjoy debating with.
This is about seriously feeble minded ogres or actual operatives up to mischief.
Don't help them.
Don't encourage them.
Judging from the hate mail, I'm quite sure some think my posts are" the debil".
That's fine, by all means if you don't like them don't vote for them.
Debate what's worthy of debating, but if someone submits "Joe is a poopyhead from mars with fish flops on his feet" don't waste electrons voting for it please.
-
-
-
55%
Klarissa10 months ago
-
guppythefishComment removed: Retracted by user
-
82%
Spadecaller10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Klarissa
Reply
I have nice things to say about many people; in fact I have done so on this very thread. I guess you don't agree with them. That's your right. Now about the hot air... that seems quite negative. Perhaps some anger management might be in order.-
-
67%
Klarissa10 months ago
-
57%
Spadecaller10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Klariss as usual, you twist reality to suit your contempt for those you dislike. You have the right to tell me to shut up. That doesn't mean you have the power to enforce it. You have the right to be full of hot air and to accuse others of the same.
Reply
You even have the right to tell me to leave Propeller and I have the right to tell you to get lost too. But, neither of us have the power to enforce it. So your first amendment reference is irrelevant. No one has usurped your rights to act like the complete fool that you have demonstrated in your childish outrage.
I am not advocating to shut anyone one up, or telling anyone to leave propeller. Are you really that mixed up that you are unable to understand that we all have rights. I have the right to denounce false stories. Do I not?
I am not a dictator. I have no power to shut anyone up or to force anyone to leave propeller. But the community has the right, if it chooses to exercise it, to prop or not prop stories. Your thinking and misguided accusations are absurd. I don't think your elevator goes to the top floor; you might want to get someone to check that out for you.-
50%
Klarissa10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
spade - have I ever told anyone on here to shut up? Have I ever told you or anyone else to leave?
Reply
I respect your right to be on here and say what you want to say.
I do not have to agree with what you say, and I have the RIGHT to say so and it should be without personal attacks in return.
Unfortunately some on here have limited vocabularies that only contain the words hate, bu__shot, anger, low life, trash, as usual, etc.
Furthermore, you have made a lot of assumptions about those that comment negatively to what you have to say. Just perhaps, you are the radical one, and others are for the American freedoms guaranteed by the constitution.-
78%
CaptainLucid10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"I do not have to agree with what you say, and I have the RIGHT to say so and it should be without personal attacks in return."
Reply
Oops we almost had it right until you mentioned that you thought that you were entitled to post without criticism, I am not here to rip you only to offer a but of advice. If you want talk politics here you better know your facts by heart, pick fights carefully, and know even if you are completely correct you will probably get ripped anyway so don't take it too personally. -
56%
ybdogsct10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
KLARISSA :
Reply
"The first amendment applies to those you don't like, don't like what they say, or represent. Telling people to shut up, or leave propeller, would be the epitomy of a dictatorship."
Did you bother to listen to the entire link in full?
The speech was NOT directed at PC25 at all. The speech was addressed to "mainstream centrist and liberal members of Propeller." SPADECALLER is not calling for censorship. In fact, I'm sure he is fully aware that as a regular member, he doesn't have the permissions necessary to remove offending posts and threads.
No, SPADECALLER's speech was addressed to "mainstream centrist and liberal members of Propeller" because it is calling for such like-minded members to exercise restraint when encountering an article filled with apparent falsehoods. In other words, don't just Prop every story that is sent to your mailbox. Read the article, evaluate its veracity and value, and then make the decision to Prop and/or comment.
SPADECALLER is not censoring.
SPADECALLER is not removing offending threads, deleting posts, or banning members.
SPADECALLER is not threatening members to Prop only his approved stories.
Spadecaller is simply asking members to exercise some discretion.
You claim the 1st Amendment gives PC25 the freedom of speech to post his stories, but you conveniently forget that the 1st Amendment also gives SPADECALLER the right to peaceably assemble in order to ensure worthy stories reach Propeller's Front Page. It works both ways -- you can't use the 1st Amendment to defend PC25 without also vindicating SPADECALLER.
In actuality, however, your futile appeal to PC25's 1st Amendment rights are bogus as this is a private forum, not a public space. And therefore, the moderators are permitted to remove threads, delete posts, and ban members as they wish.-
67%
GehlLady10 months ago
-
44%
ybdogsct10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
GELLADY:
Reply
"Then why is this the first line of the commentary posted by spade?"
1) In the quote you cited, the first words are "In their quest...." If SPADECALLER had directed his speech toward PC25, he would have used the words "In your quest..."
2) Why would SPADECALLER need to remind PC25 of what PC25 was doing?
Use your head.
Clearly, SPADECALLER was not talking to PC25, but describing to the "mainstream centrist and liberal members of Propeller" the political tactics PC25 was employing.
SPADECALLER addressed his speech to the "mainstream centrist and liberal members of Propeller" telling them about some articles posted by "PC25 and a few others" which he felt were not newsworthy. As such, SPADECALLER is encouraging members to use discretion before Propping and/or commenting on stories that reach their mailboxes.
If you can't even comprehend this much, then it's apparent your literacy skills require remediation.-
60%
GehlLady10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"If you can't even comprehend this much, then it's apparent your literacy skills require remediation."
Reply
Perhaps you should check your own.........
".In their quest"
I read" their" to be pc25 AND A FEW OTHERS..........
He was directing his 'speech' TO other members about "pc25 and a few others.
I understood him, and you as well. Parse words, nuance all you want, the meaning was very clear. He urged other people not to read, comment, or prop PC25, and a few others, submissions, in the most public way possible. He knew pc25 would see it, he deliberately called him out publicly, instead of going to his (SC) groups, or sending messages to his(SC) friends. In that sense, yes, it was directed at him, pc25, and a few others.-
25%
ybdogsct10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
GEHLLADY :
Reply
"I read" their" to be pc25 AND A FEW OTHERS.........."
1) Of course, that's who the word "their" referred to. However, Spadecaller was NOT describing the actions of "PC25 and a few others" to PC25; Spadecaller was describing the actions of "PC25 and a few others" to the "mainstream centrist and liberal members of Propeller."
Why would he have to tell PC25 what PC25 was doing? There's no logic in your statement at all.
2) If Spadecaller was to PC25, then he would have used 2nd person pronouns like "In your quest." But Spadecaller wasn't talking to PC25; he was talking to the "mainstream centrist and liberal members of Propeller" about PC25 and therefore used 3rd person pronouns like "in their quest."
I don't know why basic English is so difficult for you to understand. Is English not your native language? Or does your inability to comprehend the difference between 2nd person and 3rd person language stem from a lack of formal education?
GEHLlADY :
"He urged other people not to read, comment, or prop PC25, and a few others, submissions, in the most public way possible."
And that's certainly with Spadecaller's right to do that. Just as its within PC25's right to post whatever tabloid blogs he chooses, so is it within Spadecaller's right to organize like-minded individuals to exercise discretion in their Propping and Commenting habits. The 1st amendment protects not only PC25's right to free speech, but Spadecaller's right to peaceably assemble the "mainstream centrist and liberal members of Propeller" to exercise discretion in their Propping and Commenting habits.
Although in truth this is a private forum, not a public space so the 1st Amendment doesn't apply. However, there's certainly nothing in the TOU that prohibits organization and mobilization among Propeller members. In fact, the entire concept of having Groups, Friends, Fans, and Idols seems to promote such organization within a social news site like Propeller.
GEHLLADY :
"He knew pc25 would see it, he deliberately called him out publicly, instead of going to his (SC) groups, or sending messages to his(SC) friends. In that sense, yes, it was directed at him, pc25, and a few others."
Am I supposed to believe that despite your incredible deficiency in basic reading comprehension, that you are some sort of clairvoyant expert who can see into Spadecaller's mind and interpret his motivations?
LOL.
FYI, not everyone is as passive-aggressive as you are. There are other reasons why Spadecaller may have decided to post this as a thread instead of privately messaging his Friends.
1) Posting this as a thread was the quickest way to reach as many people as possible. It would have been incredibly tedious for Spadecaller to privately message each individual on Spadecaller's Friends List.
2) Posting this as a thread enables it to reach the silent Propeller members whose activity is limited to reading and Propping, but are otherwise not a member of any Group, Friend List, Fan List, or Idol List. Many times it is the votes of these Silent Members which enable a story to receive enough Props to reach the Front Page, so this demographic is an important one to reach for Spadecaller's message to be most effective.
In the end, you have NOTHING to prove your interpretation of Spadecaller's post and motivations. In fact, there are certain elements which I pointed above that seem to directly contradict your interpretation that Spadecaller was directing his speech at PC25.-
0%
GehlLady10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You appear to be a reasonably educated idiot.
Reply
1. I didn't attack Spadecaller.
2. I didn't say he had no right to post this submission.
3. I don't have to be clairvoyant to know that SC knew this would hit the front page, and that pc25, and a few others would see it, therefore directed at him by way of using other "likeminded' members. To claim otherwise is disingenuous.
4. By posting this as he did, he opened himself to all comments, supportive or not. By your behavior, you have only proven the worst accusations from the other members here that didn't agree with Spadecaller.
Save your insults, they do not serve you well.-
Neutral
ybdogsct10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
GEHLLADY :
Reply
"I don't have to be clairvoyant to know that SC knew this would hit the front page, and that pc25, and a few others would see it, therefore directed at him by way of using other "likeminded' members. To claim otherwise is disingenuous."
How? How would he have known that? I've submitted 82 articles myself and less than half of them have made Propeller's front page.
Once again your post lacks PROOF .
GEHLLADEY: :
"By posting this as he did, he opened himself to all comments, supportive or not. By your behavior, you have only proven the worst accusations from the other members here that didn't agree with Spadecaller."
Yes, Spadecaller did open himself to both positive and negative comments, but I never denied members the right to post negative comments at all. In fact, in my first post on this thread topic, I DEFENDED PC25 and claimed that PC25 had the right to post any article he wanted, just as Spadecaller has the right to organize "Friends" on his "Friends List" into exercising discretion when encountering one of PC25's stories. Here is the quote from my first post on this thread again in case you missed it the first time.
http://www.propeller.com/story/2009/01/08/stories-...
YBDOGSCT : "As far as the topic of this thread is concerned, I believe everyone, including PC25, should be able to post their own articles. However, I also believe that like-minded users, like Spadecaller, also have the right to organize and boycott threads that peddle falsehoods."
GEHLLADY :
"Save your insults, they do not serve you well."
It's not an insult. It's a helpful suggestion.
After all if you can't distinguish between 2nd person and 3rd person language, if you can't determine the target audience of a piece prose, then perhaps you do need to take a class or three in English literature.
Who knows? You might actually learn something.
-
-
-
-
-
0%
PatrioticAmerican10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Bullsheet Spade you can not say you where not attacking Pc25 or myself for that matter , you seem to think that the only stories that should be propped are yours and your moronic friends here on prop. You seem to think that their is only 1 side to a story and dont want the other side aired because it may contradict your BS . you and your kind (left loons) are whats bad for this site and America you want everyone to wear blinders and listen to just your side, well there are 2 sides to every story and we will continue to post our side with out censorship
Reply -
Neutral
GehlLady10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Thank you ybdogsct!"
Reply
Spade,
You are thanking him for a comment that included personal attacks on me.
I did not call you names, or attack you, or him/her. I tried to give my reaction and opinion respectfully, even though it wasn't supportive of your views. Now that I see you don't value those qualities, my former high opinion of you has changed. I do understand you most likely don't care, you obviously have more than enough friends here you don't need me, however, how sad that you would support personal attacks simply because someone disagreed with you.
Nuance however you want, this posting of yours was intended for pc25 et al to see, therefore, directed at them.-
-
-
Neutral
Sabretooth10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"You appear to be a reasonably educated idiot."
Reply
"I did not call you names, or attack you, or him/her."
"Save your insults, they do not serve you well."
An honest question, are you bipolar? In each post you seem to contradict yourself, you may want to ease off on the insults as you are making yourself an easy target.-
Neutral
GehlLady10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I had to laugh when I read your question, with my 3 quotes. Put together like that it does look contradictory, but no, I'm not bipolar.
Reply
In the first quote to ybdog, I was a little cranky at his/her post to me on my reading comprehension, and it went from there.
For the most part I do try to have, and enjoy, a respectful debate. I don't always succeed. I will take your advice, and try harder.
-
-
-
-
-
-
67%
ybdogsct10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Wrong again, SLATE.
Reply
My thread was not about PC25. It was about the Judicial Watch letter that PC25 posted as "evidence." In that thread, I spent the majority of my time laying out a well-supported argument for why Judicial Watch's conclusions should be discredited.
I realize your literacy skills are deficient from a lack of formal education, so here once again are the bits of evidence I used to discredit Judicial Watch.
Spin this.
http://hotair.com/archives/2009/01/06/blagorahma-d...
"The letter acknowledges a discussion between Blagojevich, Obama, and Joe Biden, but the full context of the letter suggests that the conversation involved economic policy and not Obama’s Senate seat. In fact, the letter appears to be nothing more than a pro-forma, polite acknowledgment of a meeting, and has no real inculpatory value. Allahpundit e-mails me to say he’s 99.9% sure that the meeting referenced was at the governors conference in Philadelphia — and that Sarah Palin probably got the same letter as Blagojevich.
Barack Obama did say that he had 'no contact' with Blagojevich, and the letter obviously negates that in a literal sense. However, the context for 'no contact' was in regards to specific discussions about replacing Obama in the Senate, not 'no contact' ever, at least between Obama himself and Blagojevich."
http://mediamatters.org/items/200803170002
"Limbaugh repeated false Judicial Watch attacks linking Obama to FARC."
http://www.domainnamenews.com/legal-issues/judicia...
"Government watchdog JudicialWatch posted an article today declaring the domain name Change.gov, the location of U.S. President-elect Barack Obama’s newest website may have been illegally granted. It seemed to us that Judicial Watch was making a mountain of a mole hill here, so we looked a little harder at what was presented.
The letter from Obama requesting the domain shows no sign of 'demands' or 'pressuring,' but merely states that they are requesting a waiver for the use. Judicial Watch is headed by Conservatives. No real surprise here."
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1208/16680.ht...
"For the folks at the conservative activist group, the Clintons have served as the most splendid political rawhide. The gnawing has gone on now for the last 15 years, and seems set to pick up anew with a Clinton return to the executive branch.
Indeed, the very word 'Clinton' once had an almost Pavlovian ring to Judicial Watch, which nearly pushed itself to fringe status with its relentless investigations of Bill Clinton’s presidency."
http://legaltimes.typepad.com/blt/2008/12/judicial...
"While U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald has stated that Obama is not a target of his investigation, Judicial Watch has tried to link the president-elect with the scandal."-
75%
slate10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"I realize your literacy skills are deficient from a lack of formal education, so here once again are the bits of evidence I used to discredit Judicial Watch."
Reply
LOL you are a Putz of the highest order aren't yas?
Act innocent all you want Dawgs even we unedumacted folks without the 'formal indoctrination' you went through can see the thread for what it was.-
33%
ybdogsct10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Is that really the best response you can muster?
Reply
It's interesting that you once again failed to make a single constructive, evidence-support comment about the SUBSTANCE of the thread -- the validity of the conclusions reached by Judicial Watch.
How expected.
LOL.-
100%
slate10 months ago
-
Neutral
ybdogsct10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I have nothing personal against PC25 or any other member on Propeller, as I don't know any of you personally. My "personal axe to grind" is SOLELY the distribution of false information, which is precisely why I always take care to support my arguments with evidence -- a practice you fail to do every time you post.
Reply
In fact, I've already stated several times, even on this very thread, that PC25 has the right to post any article he wants.
http://www.propeller.com/story/2009/01/08/stories-...
YBDOGSCT : "As far as the topic of this thread is concerned, I believe everyone, including PC25, should be able to post their own articles. However, I also believe that like-minded users, like Spadecaller, have the right to organize and boycott threads that peddle falsehoods."
http://www.propeller.com/story/2009/01/08/stories-...
YBDOGSCT : "You claim the 1st Amendment gives PC25 the freedom of speech to post his stories, but you conveniently forget that the 1st Amendment also gives SPADECALLER the right to peaceably assemble in order to ensure worthy stories reach Propeller's Front Page. It works both ways -- you can't use the 1st Amendment to defend PC25 without also vindicating SPADECALLER."
However, if PC25 Is going to open a thread for comments, he shouldn't expect all the comments to be positive. Likewise, if its within PC25's right to post any article he wants, then it's also within Spadecaller's right to organize "Friends" on his "Friends List" into exercising discretion when they come across one of PC25's articles.
Now, are YOU going to man up and stop avoiding the SUBSTANCE of my thread (the validity of the conclusions reached by Judicial Watch)? Don't forget to include direct links to your pieces of supporting documentation .
LOL.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
92%
fiftynine10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Every time i think you have something worthwhile to say all i have to do is read farther down the thread..You always start falling back on the same old.. "Perhaps some anger management might be in order."..Stuff.
Reply
You and your articles would be a lot more noteworthy if you would stop yourself before you fall back into this type of behavior. -
90%
slate10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Come on Spade you and I have stood side by side on a few issues, especially when it pertains to Israel, but you have to step back.
Reply
You used the terms, (slither. Trashy,I don't think your elevator goes to the top floor; you might want to get someone to check that out for you.) and you were ‘angry’ enough to post this thread knowing what the outcome would be (a vicious fight between members). Then you say someone else needs anger management for calling you out and saying you're full out hot air?-
77%
Sabretooth10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
So far i am not seeing this vicious fight between members that you speak of. I fully agree with Spade that maybe those of us that feel pc25 posts only lies should indeed just boycott his articles. I already have made it known that i refuse to read them anyways. I basically comment because i am by nature, combative and arguementative, in case nobody has noticed.
Reply -
-
-
RRconComment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned
-
-
84%
wtagg10 months ago
-
-
-
-
89%
wtagg10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I agree that comparing one blog entry/op-ed to another is really somewhat futile, though I don't see how the comparison helps hotair. You are stating that it is just as bad as the others and therefore the only conclusion I can reach is that you agree with the premise of the original poster.
Reply
I do find it interesting that Huffington was founded by a life long republican that has become pretty dissatisfied with the direction of the party.-
100%
slate10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
What I've seen is two threads today doing this sort of thing pointed at one member, with a few added to the list (since they were at it).
Reply
These sorts of things can be done all you want but do it privately.
i still think the best solution is being able to block comments members that you don't want to read and has asked Marcus to reinstate that function.
The one thing that amuses me here is all the nasty lies promoted by the left in the attempt to destroy Palin and they all fell in line in those threads but now they can't handle seeing it done to their guy or gal.-
100%
wtagg10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Are you suggesting that the stories directed at Blag, Obama, etc... are lies?
Reply
As far as I am concerned, pc and that crew can post all the stories they want, whether they are considered lies, faux, or not. They must be able to bear up to the logic behind the stories and be associated with the outcome. They must also be willing to be judged by the same yardstick they use. My view is that they are very good at rattling the sabre, not so good when it comes to the logic and the yardstick.-
100%
slate10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Are you suggesting that the stories directed at Blag, Obama, etc... are lies?
Reply
No not at all nor do I claim they are all true either.
My view is that they are very good at rattling the sabre, not so good when it comes to the logic and the yardstick.
The same logic holds true fro those on the left on this site I'd say. -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
90%
DarkWizard10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
wtagg,
Reply
Good catch!
The first time I saw someone use "hotair.com" as a source of a story it was either pc25 or RedRiverJ. I thought the irony was apropos for the negative content and the person posting. What got me was no one even attempted to make the connection between the name "Hot Air' and the story line. Incredible! -
-
-
-
RRconComment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned
-
-
-
76%
hyperbola10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Well, almost all of PC25's stories get a thorough debunking here on propeller, so it is good to have them. Better to expose them to deserved death in public lthan to let them fester in dark corners.
Reply
Of course, one almost has to keep a library of old "refutation" stories on hand since PC comes back to the same old, disproven lies over and over and over. -
-
67%
Klarissa10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Spade, is this one of the trashy stories???
Reply
ABC News
Funds Tie Obama to Richardson Probe Figure
Embattled Executive David Rubin Gave Thousands to Campaign
By JUSTIN ROOD
Jan. 6, 2009—
President-elect Barack Obama took big money from a man at the center of a federal probe that has forced one of Obama's top Cabinet picks to withdraw.
Financial records show the Obama campaign got more than $30,000 from California financier David Rubin, the target of an investigation into donations and possible "pay-to-play" deals involving New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, Obama's pick for commerce secretary.
Richardson removed himself from consideration for the post Sunday, saying the ongoing grand jury investigation threatened to hold up his confirmation. Richardson and Rubin have both denied any wrongdoing in the matter, which involved contributions and state business in 2003 and 2004.-
67%
mesodude10 months ago
-
stalemateComment removed: Retracted by user20 Replies
-
RRconComment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned
-
-
-
-
-
-
67%
Spadecaller10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
gwhiddon
Reply
You obvioulsy are unable to read and hear...
Show me one place on this thread that I advocate cenosrhip. Tell me where in my commentary I suggest censorship of any kind.
Boycotting stores is not censorship. Or would you like to deny me the right of calling an assembly of members to excercise their free will?
I do not expect you are able to anwer these questions with any logic; so I am sure you will avoid attempting to answer them. I will not hold my breath.
-
-
-
-
100%
TimALoftis10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
While I may not agree with all of PC25 submissions, he has a right to submit them. Each day we get fringe pieces from both sides of the political scale....some liberal and some conservative. A few I personally agree with, many I do not. Censorship is a slippery slope and one I care not to go down. Often I will disagree with a submission but I will prop it because I think the article has the ability to bring forward a good discussion here on Propeller.
Reply
With that being said I should emphasize that I don't like seeing submissions were the title/header is drastically changed to fit ones political agenda. This happens far to often here in the community and it should stop. Both sides are guilty. -
-
76%
Spadecaller10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Let me be the first to admit that I have done my part in enabling these kinds of stories by adding several comments. I have not propped them for quite a long time - over a year or more, but I have been sucked into their "I'm-right-you-idiot- you-are-wrong free for alls." However, in evaluating my part and reviewing the results, I have concluded that is best for me to leave these threads. I guess some go in for the wet t-shirt mud wrestling ego-feeding brawls that these threads generate.
Reply
I would like to believe we could do better as a community. Am I wrong?-
libsRfunnyComment removed: Hard Banned12 Replies
-
loading ...
