babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics

Topic Closed  Topic Closed


  
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » current events   » canadian politics   » Another derailed thread

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Another derailed thread
Lord Palmerston
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4901

posted 10 October 2008 11:11 AM      Profile for Lord Palmerston     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Certainly Christine Innes has lots of signs in the riding. Far more than Kate Holloway did in the provincial election who had only a handful up. Yet despite being invisible signage wise - the Liberals still got about 33% of the vote.

The Greens seem to have gotten a lot of signs up in the last week. It's hard to say if they're pulling more from the NDP or Libs in this riding - though certainly national polls suggest the latter.

Olivia Chow has a lot of signs, but not as many as Rosario Marchese did provincially - you'd think he was the only candidate on the ballot!

It will be interesting to see on election day how much signs matter - certainly the federal Libs are in much worse shape than their provincial counterparts and have lost ground - so based on trends we shouldn't expect Innes to do any better than Holloway did, percentage wise.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Lord Palmerston ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Uncle John
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14940

posted 10 October 2008 11:15 AM      Profile for Uncle John     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Signs don't vote
From: Toronto | Registered: Feb 2008  |  IP: Logged
Lord Palmerston
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4901

posted 10 October 2008 11:18 AM      Profile for Lord Palmerston     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Thanks for stating the obvious - it will be interesting to see what impact signage has, if any.
From: Toronto | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
HeywoodFloyd
token right-wing mascot
Babbler # 4226

posted 10 October 2008 11:20 AM      Profile for HeywoodFloyd     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Uncle John:
Signs don't vote

Signs on public property don't. Signs on lawns though....


From: Edmonton: This place sucks | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 10 October 2008 11:22 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Not in Toronto! I've heard way too many stories about campaigns planting signs on people's lawns without asking. Not to mention that you often see two or three signs on one lawn. Now that might indicate that there are three people in the family voting different ways, but from what I've heard, what it usually indicates is that the homeowner just says "yes" to each party that asks them to put a sign up if they're not particularly partisan.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
RosaL
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13921

posted 10 October 2008 11:26 AM      Profile for RosaL     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:
....from what I've heard, what it usually indicates is that the homeowner just says "yes" to each party that asks them to put a sign up if they're not particularly partisan.

Yes, that was my experience when I campaigned in Toronto. The thing is, once one sign is up, you have to get your own sign up just to neutralize the first one.


From: the underclass | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged
JimWaterloo
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 15626

posted 10 October 2008 11:30 AM      Profile for JimWaterloo     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Do signs affect voter decision? Any studies ever been done on the effects of signs?
From: Waterloo | Registered: Oct 2008  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 10 October 2008 11:38 AM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Four days to election day and i have yet to receive any literature or any contact whatsoever from the Liberals in T-S - maybe they should spend more time dropping at least one piece of literature per household - and less time trying to intimidate the opposition by putting up a lot of signs.
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Lord Palmerston
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4901

posted 10 October 2008 11:45 AM      Profile for Lord Palmerston     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The Liberals also tend to have these huge signs up that are total eyesores.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Lord Palmerston ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
RosaL
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13921

posted 10 October 2008 11:52 AM      Profile for RosaL     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by JimWaterloo:
Do signs affect voter decision?

I'm sure they do. Most people vote in response to advertising. It's yet another triumph for capitalist democracy.


From: the underclass | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged
mimeguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10004

posted 10 October 2008 12:21 PM      Profile for mimeguy   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I'd disagree that signs make a significant impact. They let people know that your campaign is alive but that is really about it. I talked with people who just had signs on their lawns to be supportive of whoever. Signs are stolen and replaced by others. In the provincial election there were neighbourhoods with nothing but green signs and we obviously didn't win the vote. I personally have talked to elderly people who had no idea who put the sign on their lawn or said it was a relative.

We intentionally didn't waste money on signs mixing generic signs from head office with personal campaign signs. I even argued using only generic signs to avoid waste but was overruled.

So I'm happy to let the liberals or ndp win the sign war. Strategic placement in certain areas helps but doesn't influence the outcome. There's over 80,000 voters and I doubt there are enough signs anywhere to make a difference.

Status quo media reporting is a much bigger problem than not having enough signs.


From: Ontario | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
M. Spector
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8273

posted 10 October 2008 12:29 PM      Profile for M. Spector   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Margaret Atwood's got her signs up:

Source


From: One millihelen: The amount of beauty required to launch one ship. | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
RosaL
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13921

posted 10 October 2008 12:31 PM      Profile for RosaL     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by mimeguy:

Status quo media reporting is a much bigger problem than not having enough signs.

Of course.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: RosaL ]


From: the underclass | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 12:54 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I am with Atwood and I am voting for Innes, Fidel, North Report and a few of the other sychophants finally convinced me too. After months of being told I hate the NDP and being called a Liberal because I criticize their position, I figure I might as well.

I guess I just figure NDP people can't take criticism. Nor do they listen. Why vote for that?

I am crossing my fingers it is a tight race, and with the Green Party running strong in this riding it could be tight. Even better if Chow goes down by a single vote.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Left J.A.B.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9046

posted 10 October 2008 01:03 PM      Profile for Left J.A.B.     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Of all the childish reasons to vote, or not vote for someone this takes the case. You will base your vote on what people who may or may not be what they say they are on an internet bulliten board. Frankly you don't deserve the vote, regardless of where you place it.

Funny thing about those Innes signs. They sure look orange to me. That's supposed to be a trustworthy campaign.

The longer I see places like babble and posting boards on new sites, the less inclined I am to think that very many people are worth the years of sacrfice people like the Famous Five dedicated to democratic rights. We are a reckless shame to their memories.


From: 4th and Main | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
Erstwhile
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4845

posted 10 October 2008 01:05 PM      Profile for Erstwhile     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
You're making your decision...on the basis of what some loudmouths on an Internet forum have to say.

Hm.

That doesn't make much sense. Are you quite sure you weren't going to vote Liberal anyway, and aren't using this as an excuse to tell all and sundry that they're big ol' meanieheads because you're doing what you were going to do all along?

Alternatively, making political decisions based on the Internet is like making marriage decisions based on pornography. Or something. Um.


From: Deepest Darkest Saskabush | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 01:05 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Why not? My entire exposure to rank and file NDP'rs on this site has been almost universally negative.

For example, this kind of bullshit:

quote:
sure you weren't going to vote Liberal anyway, and aren't using this as an excuse to tell all and sundry that they're big ol' meanieheads because you're doing what you were going to do all along?

Never voted Liberal in my life. Never even considered it. I am on record as a vocal Chow supporter, on this site variously.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Left J.A.B.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9046

posted 10 October 2008 01:09 PM      Profile for Left J.A.B.     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
And you know that they are for sure rank and file NDPers how? Because they say so?

Based on that I am really a CHP activist out to Christianize the world.

And you know Cueball you get back what you give, sometimes being an asshole, begets asshole back.


From: 4th and Main | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 01:12 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
What do you mean being an asshole? Doing things like pointing out when Dawn Black is backsliding on the 2006 NDP anti-war resolution? That makes me an asshole, I guess, and a Liberal.

But there you go, you reap what you sow.

Besides, its irrelevant to me who wins, frankly, elections are just a entertainment really. Like a game of chess when the house is a mess. But, since you all take it so seriously I guess I'll make a bet on a horse, just to piss some loudmouths sychophants off.


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Lord Palmerston
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4901

posted 10 October 2008 01:14 PM      Profile for Lord Palmerston     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Dawn Black is one NDPer I wouldn't lose too much sleep over if she lost (I don't think she will though).
From: Toronto | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
writer
editor emeritus
Babbler # 2513

posted 10 October 2008 01:15 PM      Profile for writer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Okay. Please stop the pile on. I have seen people slag Cueball as a Liberal (etc.) more than a few times. It is stupid to do, and groundless. I have said so more than a few times.

Some posters have had their accounts suspended, because they can't stop slinging crap like this.

I don't know who they think they are winning over.

This being a democracy and all, Cueball is free to vote how he wishes, for whatever reason. I say this as a member of the NDP. Imagine!


From: tentative | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
Erstwhile
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4845

posted 10 October 2008 01:16 PM      Profile for Erstwhile     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
For the record, I don't have a horse in this race. I couldn't honestly care less how Cueball votes.

However, being the type to spend far too much time on the Internet, I've certainly seen far too many dramatic flourishes along the lines of "you all suck so I'm going to do exactly what you don't want me to do!", many of which I suspect - I don't know - are really nothing more than a "nyah, nyah" response to equally vacuous digs.

EDIT: Also the "well I don't really care anyway" post...

And also, being the type to spend far too much time on the Internet, I certainly admit I've taken Internet forum yammering far too seriously in my time, and the thought of actually making a serious decision based on Intarweb arguin' seems kinda silly.

Also also, I have a well-muscled swimmer's build, a seven-figure income, and a PhD in Gettin' it On.*

* Only one of these is true, and that only if you count the numerals to the right of the decimal point.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Erstwhile ]


From: Deepest Darkest Saskabush | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Lord Palmerston
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4901

posted 10 October 2008 01:18 PM      Profile for Lord Palmerston     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Kind of reminds me of the good old days of "Adam Vaughan is a Liberal" (sic.)
From: Toronto | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 01:22 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Erstwhile:
For the record, I don't have a horse in this race. I couldn't honestly care less how Cueball votes.

However, being the type to spend far too much time on the Internet, I've certainly seen far too many dramatic flourishes along the lines of "you all suck so I'm going to do exactly what you don't want me to do!", many of which I suspect - I don't know - are really nothing more than a "nyah, nyah" response to equally vacuous digs.

EDIT: Also the "well I don't really care anyway" post...

And also, being the type to spend far too much time on the Internet, I certainly admit I've taken Internet forum yammering far too seriously in my time, and the thought of actually making a serious decision based on Intarweb arguin' seems kinda silly.

Also also, I have a well-muscled swimmer's build, a seven-figure income, and a PhD in Gettin' it On.*

* Only one of these is true, and that only if you count the numerals to the right of the decimal point.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Erstwhile ]


Right, and you are saying this without have a clue what I think and believe, though I have stated what I think and believe so many times here that it is not even funny.

"Your problem, Barton, is that You Do NOT listen".

You think in entirely partisan bi-linear constructs of opposites, like George Bush; "if you are not with us, you are with the Liberals". There is nothing I detest more than that.

You merely had to read my posts to find out that nothing I think has any correlation with Liberal party ideas. Nor does it have much to do with the NDP, anymore.

So, now I have decided that the only way to get rid of the pseudo-left NDP is to try and erradicate it. And the best way to erradicate it is to vote against it.

Then perhaps something with a tangible "left" focus might emerge. I will be voting strategically.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 10 October 2008 01:29 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
This kind of reminds me of some far left communists in Chile who thought Salvador Allende was a sell-out and wasn't radical enough and so they rejoiced at Pinochet's coup - because it would "teach Allende a lesson".

On a similar note, i still remember some people in the 1995 Ontario election who decided to vote for Mike Harris to "teach Bob Rae a lesson" - and look what they got...and i'm not sure that Rae learned any lesson from it either.


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 01:31 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Something like that, but you remind me of this:


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
writer
editor emeritus
Babbler # 2513

posted 10 October 2008 01:31 PM      Profile for writer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Hopefully the ONDP did, though. I wouldn't bet on it, however.
From: tentative | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
Erstwhile
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4845

posted 10 October 2008 01:35 PM      Profile for Erstwhile     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:
[QB]

Right, and you are saying this without have a clue what I think and believe, ...

You think in entirely partisan bi-linear constructs of opposites, like George Bush;


Back atcha, buddy.

I don't know what you've written in the past and honestly I don't care...what you said in this thread, however, is:

quote:
I am with Atwood and I am voting for Innes, Fidel, North Report and a few of the other sychophants finally convinced me too.

After months of being told I hate the NDP and being called a Liberal because I criticize their position, I figure I might as well.

I guess I just figure NDP people can't take criticism. Nor do they listen. Why vote for that?


No mention of strategic voting. No mention of eradicating the NDP to "save the Left". No, you're voting Liberal because Rabble's full of doo-doo heads and you'll show 'em, by gum. If you don't want to be held to account for what you, y'know, actually say? Then say what you actually mean.

And now, apparently, you have. I think your argument's nonsense, but whatever.


From: Deepest Darkest Saskabush | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Lord Palmerston
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4901

posted 10 October 2008 01:40 PM      Profile for Lord Palmerston     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by writer:
Hopefully the ONDP did, though. I wouldn't bet on it, however.

No they haven't. They do the same thing as Rae -take credit for "good things" but blame Rae for being "fiscally irresponsible" just as Rae takes credit for the "good things" but blames the "party he was stuck with" for being "fiscally irresponsible."

One of the most annoying things in the last election was how Hampton, a Cabinet minister in the Rae govt., saying how "we knew Rae was a Liberal all along."

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Lord Palmerston ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Albireo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3052

posted 10 October 2008 01:49 PM      Profile for Albireo     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:
I am with Atwood and I am voting for Innes, Fidel, North Report and a few of the other sychophants finally convinced me too. After months of being told I hate the NDP and being called a Liberal because I criticize their position, I figure I might as well.

I guess I just figure NDP people can't take criticism. Nor do they listen. Why vote for that?


Good point... Please be sure NOT vote for Fidel or North Report.

From: --> . <-- | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 01:50 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I'll be voting for Innes.

quote:
Originally posted by Erstwhile:
Back atcha, buddy.

I don't know what you've written in the past and honestly I don't care...what you said in this thread, however, is:


No. I personally think that with NAFTA and creation of the international free trade agreements, and the assertion of neo-liberalism as the de facto ruling ideology that institutions like parliment no longer had a direct legal mechanism with which to control, or intervene in the economy, since that control has been vested in international trade organizations, and legal bodies that beyond the control of local democratic structures.

As such the agendas of all parties are confined to a very specific and limited set of possibilities, that have been set up to purposely exclude any kind of state management, or intervention in the economy beyond cosmetic adjustement: It would be impossible, under the present structure of how power is managed for a party to actually "rule from the left," because parliment is no longer empowered to do so.

Therefore "cap and trade," to encourage industries to comply, as opposed to legally sanctioning them with non-compliance.

So therefore, it does not matter which party I vote for since all I am voting for, or against, are cosmetic adjustments around so called "social issues," such as indpendent religious school boards v. a unified secular school board.

Then of course, there are the "doo doo heads" who think that saying things such as the above amount to being a Liberal, so why the fuck not, since Laytone et al would simply back down on any positive social agenda they promise, when the reality of the limits of parlimentary power they seek became apparent, as has every single provincial NDP government, for the last 20 years.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Lord Palmerston
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4901

posted 10 October 2008 02:01 PM      Profile for Lord Palmerston     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:
No. I personally think that with NAFTA and creation of the international free trade agreements, and the assertion of neo-liberalism as the de facto ruling ideology that institutions like parliment no longer had a direct legal mechanism with which to control, or intervene in the economy, since that control has been vested in international trade organizations, and legal bodies that beyond the control of local democratic structures.

As such the agendas of all parties are confined to a very specific and limited set of possibilities, that have been set up to purposely exclude any kind of state management, or intervention in the economy beyond cosmetic adjustement. Therefore, it would be impossible, under the present structure of how power is managed for a party to actually "rule from the left," because parliment is no longer empowered to do so.


Well said (would you be able to write my SSHRC application for me? Social democrats everywhere have either embraced neoliberalism or at least can't fight effectively against it.

I still support the NDP though because it is a working class political tendency which will yes make neoliberalism somewhat more humane and hold back some of its most destructive effects. The Liberals are a party of the corporate elite, pure and simple and govern like the old PC's in power.

Anyway cueball is clearly criticizing the NDP from the left - that doesn't make him a Liberal. There is a small handful of "radicals" - like Jim Stanford - who criticize the NDP and then embrace the Libs (rather foolishly I think) but I wouldn't cueball in this camp.


From: Toronto | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 10 October 2008 02:02 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Provincial governments are subject to FTA-NAFTA constraints to a large degree.

Federal governments can do whatever in hell they want. Observe the very neoliberal Warshington and London today bailing out banks and semi-nationalisations. What would Maggie and Ronny say?


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 02:04 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Maggie would say "Gotcha!".
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 10 October 2008 02:06 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The Liberals are the party that gave us NAFTA, the SPP and have always been the most pro-free trade pro-business party.

Ever heard the expression "cutting off your nose to spite your face"???

Oh well, if you are going to cast your vote based on wanting to spite a couple of people you don't get along with on babble - then all i can say is I pity anyone so petty!


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 02:13 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Well, its also a vote against you. You're politics are terrible, and have no clear principles other than some kind of odd party loyalty to a party which pretends to be from a political tradition that you disagree with, for the most part.

And all this constant "deflection" about blaming the Liberals, as opposed to answering the critique is precisely the kind of shit I dispise.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Coyote
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4881

posted 10 October 2008 02:17 PM      Profile for Coyote   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Vote as you wish, Cueball. You know I respect you. I can hope that the positive work that Olivia Chow has done will change your mind come voting time, but whichever way you go you still have my respect.
From: O’ for a good life, we just might have to weaken. | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Bookish Agrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7538

posted 10 October 2008 02:27 PM      Profile for Bookish Agrarian   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by writer:
Okay. Please stop the pile on. I have seen people slag Cueball as a Liberal (etc.) more than a few times. It is stupid to do, and groundless. I have said so more than a few times.

Some posters have had their accounts suspended, because they can't stop slinging crap like this.

I don't know who they think they are winning over.

This being a democracy and all, Cueball is free to vote how he wishes, for whatever reason. I say this as a member of the NDP. Imagine!


Well writer I have never interacted with Cueball because it pretty obvious to me he is not interested in disucssion, just attacking. That said I could care less how he votes, regardless of how stupid a reason he stated cause for doing so is.
It reminds my of my children who often agrue about not doing something, just because the other one wants to do it. I expect them to grow up at some point. I don't hold out much hope for a lot of people I see on babble.


From: Home of this year's IPM | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
Lord Palmerston
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4901

posted 10 October 2008 02:28 PM      Profile for Lord Palmerston     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
My prediction for Trinity-Spadina:

NDP, 47%
Liberals, 34%
Conservatives, 9%
Greens, 9%
others, 1%


From: Toronto | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 10 October 2008 02:28 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Liberals represent big business and banks, same as the Tories. The Liberals showed their true colours in the 1990's with favouring banksters and fossil fuel companies over Canadian workers. Cueball, those people don't carry lunch pails or brown paper bags to work on a morning. They wouldn't spit on working class people if we were on fire.
From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 02:30 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Exactly the kind of deflective crap that does not in any way shape or form respond to the critique, except by pointing at the other guy, that is essence of the corruption in your party.

That's not convincing. That is irritating. Thanks for nothing. If I want bullshit, I can get if from the real Liberals. The fact that it is spewed here day in day out, just convinces me more in the essential corruption of the institution.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Bookish Agrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7538

posted 10 October 2008 02:33 PM      Profile for Bookish Agrarian   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
You see Cueball that is exactly what I was getting at. You are about nothing but attacking others for what you perceive as shortcomings. However, I have yet to see a postive nature to your interaction. Frankly I could care less, but blaming others for your shortcomings is a bit rich when you get so pissy about it.
From: Home of this year's IPM | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 02:35 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I know you "could care less". I wrote above very clearly what it is I think and believe, but you have not bothered to read it, consider it or respond. Yeah. You don't listen, nor do you want to.

All that matters is wether or not I make nicey-nicey with Layton, and don't point out that his Defence Critic is backsliding on NDP promises, and she is not anywhere even near power.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
MUN Prof.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13839

posted 10 October 2008 02:36 PM      Profile for MUN Prof.     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The Liberals have to get some votes. Can we take a poll here?
From: Sin Jawns | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged
Bookish Agrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7538

posted 10 October 2008 02:39 PM      Profile for Bookish Agrarian   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yes I did my friend.
I think it is stupid reasoning, which is my right. And yes I could care less about some unknown poster on an internet site who may be, for all I know, a 12 year old boy living in Clevland and have no connection to Toronto at all. But you see I am a bad person in your eyes for the simple crime of thinking your reasoning is unsound. Sounds to me you are one of those people who are really good a dishing it out, and very poor at taking it.

From: Home of this year's IPM | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 02:41 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Oh, so what is wrong with my reasoning regarding the emasculation of the parlimentary process by the implimentation of international trade agreements that are beyond the control of local legislative bodies?

How was it "stupid"?

I can see you are really working hard at giving Innes my vote with the 12 year old clevland crap. Losing one vote at a time, that is the spirit!

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 02:45 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Bah. This is bullshit.
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Bookish Agrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7538

posted 10 October 2008 02:45 PM      Profile for Bookish Agrarian   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
And here I thought this was about you teaching the evil NDP a thing or two by voting Liberal in a thread about a specific riding. Instead you want a discussion on trade issues. If that is the case, how be you start a thread, with no castigating remarks and see where that goes.
If you really want a discussion you constant attacking of others or the organizations they belong to than behaving as you do is very much stupid. Since I don't beleive that is what you want anyway than keep on truckin

From: Home of this year's IPM | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
Interested Observer
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 15559

posted 10 October 2008 02:47 PM      Profile for Interested Observer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:
The Liberals are the party that gave us NAFTA, the SPP and have always been the most pro-free trade pro-business party.

I'm hoping that David Orchard gets in as a liberal in sask. and makes some noise in that party.


From: BC | Registered: Sep 2008  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 10 October 2008 02:47 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:
Exactly the kind of deflective crap that does not in any way shape or form respond to the critique, except by pointing at the other guy, that is essence of the corruption in your party.

Pierre Fortin and Industry Canada said that in a comparison of aggregate economic performances of 35 or 40 industrialized countries in the decade of the 90's, Canada's economy performed about the worst. Chretien and Martin put unnecessary debt payment to banksters ahead of the interests of Canadian families. And Martin, Manley and company resisted our auditor general's demands to stop cooking federal accounting books until the 2000's.

Canada's Liberal government were little more than warmongering plutocrats stooging for Crazy George II from 2002 to crash and burn in 2006.

And the Liberals were arrogant as well as corrupt through most of it.

I listened to Dion's recent interview with CTV. I gave him the benefit of the doubt with his hearing impairment. What I heard were a few NDP ideas for infrastructure spending and job training rolling off his lips. But when the rubber hits the pavement, Liberals will side with Tories and against the NDP and Bloc. That is their record in power, and not just since 2006 but for a long time running.


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 02:51 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Bookish Agrarian:
And here I thought this was about you teaching the evil NDP a thing or two by voting Liberal in a thread about a specific riding. Instead you want a discussion on trade issues. If that is the case, how be you start a thread, with no castigating remarks and see where that goes.
If you really want a discussion you constant attacking of others or the organizations they belong to than behaving as you do is very much stupid. Since I don't beleive that is what you want anyway than keep on truckin

What? You come here day in and day out "attacking of others and the organizations they belong to", but if someone does that to the NDP, oh my my my, that is sin. I guess that means that you don't really want a "discussion" either.

That is more or less my point. NDP'rs act as if they own the board and all posters have to go through some kind of hazing process, if they don't lock step with THE party, they get abused, called "Liberals" or whatever.

You weren't actually interested in any kind of discussion, because in fact I have made the above point numerously on many occassions, but today it seems for the first time you actually read it.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Bookish Agrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7538

posted 10 October 2008 02:56 PM      Profile for Bookish Agrarian   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:
What? You come here day in and day out "attacking of others and the organizations they belong to", but if someone does that to the NDP, oh my my my, that is sin.

I presume this was addressed at me, and I call bullshit and thank you as well for proving my dish it out observation.

I am critical of everyone, including the NDP. If I am less critical of the NDP it is only because that partisan organization alligns more directly to my world view. I will also challenge those who attack the NDP without a shred of evidence, credibility and with out right lies. Sorry it offends you that I might actually stand up for what I believe in, instead of being a couch potato quarterback.
I have never, nor do I attack people or their views, just because they differ from me. I might counter them, but that is called debate and conversation, something you seem to need some help with.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Bookish Agrarian ]


From: Home of this year's IPM | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 02:58 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
You think that voting for the NDP is standing up for what you believe in? I say it contributing to the dellusion that it might do something.
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Lord Palmerston
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4901

posted 10 October 2008 02:59 PM      Profile for Lord Palmerston     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by writer:
Okay. Please stop the pile on. I have seen people slag Cueball as a Liberal (etc.) more than a few times. It is stupid to do, and groundless. I have said so more than a few times.

Some posters have had their accounts suspended, because they can't stop slinging crap like this.

I don't know who they think they are winning over.

This being a democracy and all, Cueball is free to vote how he wishes, for whatever reason. I say this as a member of the NDP. Imagine!



From: Toronto | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Coyote
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4881

posted 10 October 2008 03:01 PM      Profile for Coyote   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I agree with writer. cueball has the right to exercise his franchise as he sees fit, for the reasons that he sees fit to do so.

The vitriol here serves no good purpose.


From: O’ for a good life, we just might have to weaken. | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Bookish Agrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7538

posted 10 October 2008 03:02 PM      Profile for Bookish Agrarian   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:
You think that voting for the NDP is standing up for what you believe in? I say it contributing to the dellusion that it might do something.

Did I say voting NDP is standing up for what I believe in. If so please show me. Otherwise it is just another attempt at deflection.

Wah Wah Nobody likes me, every body hates me
I am going to the garden to eat worms.

If you want better interaction try living by example, not by your current behaviour.


From: Home of this year's IPM | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 03:03 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Meh fuck you.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Bookish Agrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7538

posted 10 October 2008 03:05 PM      Profile for Bookish Agrarian   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Coyote:
I agree with writer. cueball has the right to exercise his franchise as he sees fit, for the reasons that he sees fit to do so.

The vitriol here serves no good purpose.


He has the right to vote how he wants, he does not have the right to treat all NDP babblers in terms that suggest we are all corrupt fakes. That is what he was doing and continues to do in thread after thread.
If he said I am voting thus, because of a- fine, but then he links it to babblers. That should be off side.


From: Home of this year's IPM | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
Bookish Agrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7538

posted 10 October 2008 03:07 PM      Profile for Bookish Agrarian   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:
Meh fuck you. This is what I am saying. I am saying my interactions with NDP'rs on this web site has in fact made me hate the NDP. And I do.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]


How are the worms my poor boy. I bet with all the rain they are nice and juicy.
You really are starting to remind me of my teens who treat others like shit, but get upset when they get a little bit back.
Perhaps you should have a wee lookie in the mirror dearie.


From: Home of this year's IPM | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 03:08 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The NDP is a corrupt fake left party. I have every right to say that. But you seem to think that your stupid orange lawns sign gives you some kind of special privilege here.

I am tired of this culture of entitlement.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Interested Observer
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 15559

posted 10 October 2008 03:10 PM      Profile for Interested Observer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Bookish Agrarian:

[One] has the right to vote how he wants, [One] does not have the right to treat all [insert party of preference here] babblers in terms that suggest [they] are all corrupt fakes.

QFT


From: BC | Registered: Sep 2008  |  IP: Logged
Bookish Agrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7538

posted 10 October 2008 03:12 PM      Profile for Bookish Agrarian   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:
The NDP is a corrupt fake left party. I have every right to say that. But you seem to think that your stupid orange lawns sign gives you some kind of special privilege here.

I am tired of this culture of entitlement.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]


You are free to believe what you like, but don't cry when you make statements like that and someone has the gall to actually challenge you on a discussion board that is built to allow that.

You really are reminding me of a child. A younger child that torrments an older sibling, bugging them and bugging them to get them to react and when they do go crying to Mommy or Daddy about how mean they are and that you had no idea why they got mad like that. You are so obvious it is hilarious.


From: Home of this year's IPM | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
Lord Palmerston
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4901

posted 10 October 2008 03:13 PM      Profile for Lord Palmerston     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Can we take this fight elsewhere?
From: Toronto | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Bookish Agrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7538

posted 10 October 2008 03:13 PM      Profile for Bookish Agrarian   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Interested Observer:

QFT


no idea what that means


From: Home of this year's IPM | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 03:14 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Bookish Agrarian:

You are free to believe what you like, but don't cry when you make statements like that and someone has the gall to actually challenge you on a discussion board that is built to allow that.

You really are reminding me of a child. A younger child that torrments an older sibling, bugging them and bugging them to get them to react and when they do go crying to Mommy or Daddy about how mean they are and that you had no idea why they got mad like that. You are so obvious it is hilarious.


Fuck you. What's so hard to underatand about that.

I made an arguement, I asked you to respond to it, you basically told me you weren't interested in discussing it, and now you have degenerated into a series of personal insults.

So, go fuck yourself. And fuck your gleeclub "party" too.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Lord Palmerston
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4901

posted 10 October 2008 03:18 PM      Profile for Lord Palmerston     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I'm still curious about what impact the Greens will have here. While polls don't show the NDP losing votes to the Greens nationally, that may not be the case in Trinity-Spadina. A lot of the NDP vote bled to the Greens in the provincial election, even though the NDP didn't drop in the popular vote province-wide.

It may also be a question of Layton vs. Hampton or Chow vs. Marchese.


From: Toronto | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 03:19 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Interested Observer:

QFT


Absoluely right on the money. Someone gets it.


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Interested Observer
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 15559

posted 10 October 2008 03:22 PM      Profile for Interested Observer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Bookish Agrarian:

no idea what that means


Quote For Truth

It usually means someone agrees with you, however in this case I'm pointing out irony or the truth that should have been stated.


From: BC | Registered: Sep 2008  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 03:24 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
You missed the edit:

quote:
Originally posted by Bookish Agrarian:

[One] has the right to vote how he wants, [One] does not have the right to treat all [insert party of preference here] babblers in terms that suggest [they] are all corrupt fakes.


NDP'rs do this all the time, to anyone who does not agree with them basically. But there is a culture of entitlement here, where NDP'rs feel they can do this to others, but seem to feel otherwise when they are the target.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
RevolutionPlease
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14629

posted 10 October 2008 03:25 PM      Profile for RevolutionPlease     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Bookish Agrarian:

no idea what that means


It means Quoted For Truth and the altering of your words seems to indicate that what you were saying could be said better?

I'm NDP and object to some of Cueball's tactics here but I saw Cueball taking plenty the other day, so I get his frustration.

For me, I see the NDP selling out a bit too but it seems to be working. The electorate is taking them more seriously, that needs to be taken into account. I'm not happy that's the fact but still see the NDP as the only means to an end.

Perhaps, we could try to learn a new way of politics.


From: Aurora | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 03:27 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Now there is an idea!
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Lord Palmerston
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4901

posted 10 October 2008 03:27 PM      Profile for Lord Palmerston     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
If this doesn't stop I'm going to post the results for each poll in the last federal election in Trinity-Spadina riding, one per thread.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Lord Palmerston ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 10 October 2008 03:28 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:

I am tired of this culture of entitlement.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]


Then you must abandon the entitlement party and vote NDP! The more the merrier.


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Interested Observer
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 15559

posted 10 October 2008 03:29 PM      Profile for Interested Observer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Palmerston:
If this doesn't stop I'm going to post the results for each poll in the last federal election in Trinity-Spadina riding, one per thread.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Lord Palmerston ]



From: BC | Registered: Sep 2008  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 03:31 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The other day I asked who the other candidates in Trinity Spadina and some jackass came along and said:

quote:
The only sign that probably would be appropriate is one that says Liberal supporter Cueball hates the NDP.

From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Lord Palmerston
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4901

posted 10 October 2008 03:32 PM      Profile for Lord Palmerston     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Poll 1 (141 votes cast):

NDP 69
LIB 56
GRN 9
CPC 4


From: Toronto | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 03:32 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Fidel:

Then you must abandon the entitlement party and vote NDP! The more the merrier.


I am voting Liberal just to make your dreams come true.


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 10 October 2008 03:39 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post

From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Bookish Agrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7538

posted 10 October 2008 03:43 PM      Profile for Bookish Agrarian   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:
The other day I asked who the other candidates in Trinity Spadina and some jackass came along and said:


So that means that everyone is the NDP is bad? Don't you see how silly that is. Christ on a stick if I hated every party that has an asshole or two in it, I would be down to only liking the Natural Law Party and maybe not even them.

For the record I think comments like that are wrong and childish Cueball, but so are comments demeaning every babbler who supports the NDP by the actions of a few others and pretending no one who is a member of or supports the NDP ever critical of it

Poll 15 (253 votes cast)
NDP 115
Lib 120
Others 18


From: Home of this year's IPM | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
Lord Palmerston
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4901

posted 10 October 2008 03:43 PM      Profile for Lord Palmerston     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Poll 2 (198 votes cast):

NDP 96
LIB 82
GRN 9
CPC 6

hey here's an idea...


From: Toronto | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 03:45 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Bookish Agrarian:

So that means that everyone is the NDP is bad? Don't you see how silly that is. Christ on a stick if I hated every party that has an asshole or two in it, I would be down to only liking the Natural Law Party and maybe not even them.


I only began to say that the people in the NDP were bad when they began to abuse me on the internet. For example this theme that I "hate" the NDP was started the other day by that Kropotkin fellow. Now in which thread where, did I say I hate the NDP, ever?

Variously, a bunch of newbies picked up on this theme, to the point where I post a question about independent candidates in my riding who might be interesting, and the first thing that comes my way is this shitty "Liberal supporter Cueball hates the NDP."

Then of course their is the repetition of the "liberal" smear. I really have had enough of it.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Bookish Agrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7538

posted 10 October 2008 03:51 PM      Profile for Bookish Agrarian   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
That's wrong, but again that is not all New Dems on babble. Hell it isn't even a significant percentage of them.
From: Home of this year's IPM | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 03:54 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yes, well maybe so. But my exposure to the culture of the NDP is largely through this board, and my experience is that to dissent is to be given a good hazing and to be smeared repeatedly.
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Bookish Agrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7538

posted 10 October 2008 03:59 PM      Profile for Bookish Agrarian   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
T'ain't that true of almost ever board of every descriptions on the internet. I am sure there is some kind of bizarre hazing ritual on Barbie collector web boards and no doubt there is some of that going on on sites dedicated to discussion of flower arranging. It is the nature of the beast in some ways.
From: Home of this year's IPM | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 10 October 2008 04:00 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
But my exposure to the culture of the NDP is largely through this board

The NDP has about 80,000 card-carrying members across Canada - half a dozen of whom post regularly in babble (including yours truly).

I'm sure that there are plenty of Liberal and Conservative partisans who you might also find unpleasant. Why don't you try talking politics with Jason Cherniak and let us know if you still feel like voting Liberal.


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 04:01 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Bookish Agrarian:
T'ain't that true of almost ever board of every descriptions on the internet. I am sure there is some kind of bizarre hazing ritual on Barbie collector web boards and no doubt there is some of that going on on sites dedicated to discussion of flower arranging. It is the nature of the beast in some ways.

Well, there doesn't seem to much "new" or "democratic" about hazing and smearing.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Bookish Agrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7538

posted 10 October 2008 04:06 PM      Profile for Bookish Agrarian   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Again, I object to you characterizing an entire group of people because of a few anonymous posters. They don't speak for me any more than I speak for them.

It seems like that is all you want to do though, and that is the part that bugs me.

From: Home of this year's IPM | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 04:08 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
What is "new" and "democratic" about hazing a smearing? That is the culture of the NDP as I have experienced it here. I sure as hell am not voting for that kind of crap. To me, its all same old same old.

Anyway I have made up my mind. I'll vote for the people with the red signs. At least they are red.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Bookish Agrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7538

posted 10 October 2008 04:12 PM      Profile for Bookish Agrarian   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Again you are smearing every New Democrat on babble, by claiming that we are all hazing and smearing and that this is NDP culture. You have no evidence of that and you cannot make that claim based on a handful of anonymous posters. It is like saying all ice cream sucks because I had a bad experience with one tub of chunky monkey.
From: Home of this year's IPM | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
Bookish Agrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7538

posted 10 October 2008 04:13 PM      Profile for Bookish Agrarian   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
At least they are red

From: Home of this year's IPM | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 04:13 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
But its not just me, here is an excerpt from a PM I got:

quote:
Is it me or is everybody on this site that does not 100% support whatever is the current NDP position on a particular issue, automatically considered a Liberal?

From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Bookish Agrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7538

posted 10 October 2008 04:14 PM      Profile for Bookish Agrarian   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
At least they are red

In the picture from Atwoods lawn they look pretty orange to me actually.


From: Home of this year's IPM | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
Erik Redburn
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5052

posted 10 October 2008 04:14 PM      Profile for Erik Redburn     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Cueball just has an irrational hatred for the NDP, common amongst radicals who never dare go as far as doing their own organizing or homework.
From: Broke but not bent. | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 04:15 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Right on queue with the hazing and smearing.
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
martin dufresne
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11463

posted 10 October 2008 04:15 PM      Profile for martin dufresne   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Aha!
I knew that the chunky monkey issue would resurface some day...

From: "Words Matter" (Mackinnon) | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Bookish Agrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7538

posted 10 October 2008 04:17 PM      Profile for Bookish Agrarian   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I am so often on the cutting edge of issue awareness
From: Home of this year's IPM | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 04:18 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Redburn:
Cueball just has an irrational hatred for the NDP, common amongst radicals who never dare go as far as doing their own organizing or homework.


So, why is this bullshit allowed to stand on this board?


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Interested Observer
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 15559

posted 10 October 2008 04:19 PM      Profile for Interested Observer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Bookish Agrarian:
Again you are smearing every New Democrat on babble, by claiming that we are all hazing and smearing and that this is NDP culture. You have no evidence of that and you cannot make that claim based on a handful of anonymous posters. It is like saying all ice cream sucks because I had a bad experience with one tub of chunky monkey.

I don't see him as smearing every dipper on babble.

There are those that don't automatically attack the credibility of the poster for not sharing their point of view.

However, my overall experience has been somewhat similar.


From: BC | Registered: Sep 2008  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 04:20 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I am going out rip down some Chow signs tonight I think.
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 04:28 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So do "new" "democrats" have any explanation for what is "new" and "Democratic" about this, statement?

quote:
Originally posted by Erik Redburn:
Cueball just has an irrational hatred for the NDP, common amongst radicals who never dare go as far as doing their own organizing or homework.

From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Webgear
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9443

posted 10 October 2008 04:30 PM      Profile for Webgear     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
That sounds like fun, can I help.

Perhaps we could target all political parties except for the fringe organizations?


From: Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 04:30 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
It is going to be fun.
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Webgear
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9443

posted 10 October 2008 04:36 PM      Profile for Webgear     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
We should put the signs of opposition parties on the front laws of other leader’s properties.

It would be funny seeing Jack holding a conservative party sign early Saturday morning.

It would make a great picture.


From: Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
bagkitty
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 15443

posted 10 October 2008 04:39 PM      Profile for bagkitty     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Interested Observor.

please stop acting like a total arse by opening multiple pointless threads. could you please confine yourself to either making your point or venting in just one?

[Edited to correct MY mistake. I initially incorrectly addressed this to Cueball instead of Interested Observor. I have corrected this and apologized to Cueball.]

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: bagkitty ]


From: Calgary | Registered: Aug 2008  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 04:40 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I don't think I have started a thread on this board in a month... what are you talking about?

But yeah, come after me, why not?

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
bagkitty
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 15443

posted 10 October 2008 04:43 PM      Profile for bagkitty     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
My apologies Cueball, it was IO who was opening them, you simply had posted in them immediately afterwards. I am sorry I suggested you initiated them.

I will edit my original post to correctly identify IO.


From: Calgary | Registered: Aug 2008  |  IP: Logged
Sean in Ottawa
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4173

posted 10 October 2008 04:46 PM      Profile for Sean in Ottawa     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Cueball, as one who has argued both on your side and against you, I can easily respect your decision to vote as you wish and to declare that decision publicly.

I have to say that your tarring of an entire party based on a few people is harder to respect. I have found that there is quite a variety of NDP supporters here including those who will support everything the party does blindly and rudely and those, like myself, who criticize it quite often even though I believe that it is the best of the available options.

I don't like being included in your description of NDPers here just by an association to the party that some 18-22% of Canadians hold. I think about every policy I support and do not support things just because a party I support does. You can read my comments even in this election where it is clear that I am an NDP supporter but had no problem criticizing the party for its original position on May being in the debates for example.

I sometimes disagree with you sometimes agree-- I realize you write with passion and I like that. However, I also find that very often you come out very sarcastically and aggressively and this invites the same in return from those who happen not to agree with you. On occasion that has included me.

I do believe a good party is one you can fight with at times and where passion has a place. I do not agree with your suggestion that the NDP has one mind or one character -- it is a party where unity is often difficult to achieve. I have found there are people here who claim to be NDPers who I respect immensely while there are others who drive me up the wall with their blind loyalty.

As far as leaving the NDP to go to the Liberals because the NDP is petty and small, I have a personal reaction. The Liberals are the party that had Warren Kinsella go to Vancouver to buy dirt on Kim Campbell from her school friends- this was reported publicly. He did this after going to Dennis Buekert who was an author I was working with at the time and ask him not to do business with me because of a dispute I had with the Liberal party. This is the party that sent a letter to all their MPs and Senators including my own MP demanding that they not reply to me rather than address the issues I was raising (even the Ottawa Citizen which was Liberal at the time had to comment on that disgusting anti-democratic crap). This was the party that I heard asked local Ottawa bookstores to stop buying my publishing company's books because I had a lawsuit against them.

So if you are leaving the NDP and going to the Liberals because they are a party of principle-- there are many public stories about their vindictiveness and pettiness-- good luck.

I have another personal reaction-- there is a person at work who speaks very well of me-- but the support is so overwhelming and so overdone that it is embarrassing to me and I believe it hurts me in my job. I do not accept responsibility for what one person who has the best intentions does for me that in the end becomes very unhelpful and I do not hold the NDP accountable for the excesses or rudeness of each person who happens to claim to be a supporter. Fairly, I do not judge the Liberals and the Cons either based on that-- to judge a party based on a person, that person should be at least in the employ of the party if not the leader.
Put differently the person you judge the party by should be one endorsed by the party not a person who merely endorses the party. And if you hate the NDP because you hate me-- that falls into the same category-- I passed no test when I made my donation and got my card.


From: Ottawa | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
Interested Observer
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 15559

posted 10 October 2008 04:47 PM      Profile for Interested Observer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I merely started them based on a reply I made in another thread. If people find a use for them they will remain active. If not, and people don't get it or enjoy them, they will die.
From: BC | Registered: Sep 2008  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 04:50 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Sean in Ottawa:
Cueball, as one who has argued both on your side and against you, I can easily respect your decision to vote as you wish and to declare that decision publicly.

I have to say that your tarring of an entire party based on a few people is harder to respect. I have found that there is quite a variety of NDP supporters here including those who will support everything the party does blindly and rudely and those, like myself, who criticize it quite often even though I believe that it is the best of the available options.

I don't like being included in your description of NDPers here just by an association to the party that some 18-22% of Canadians hold. I think about every policy I support and do not support things just because a party I support does. You can read my comments even in this election where it is clear that I am an NDP supporter but had no problem criticizing the party for its original position on May being in the debates for example.

I sometimes disagree with you sometimes agree-- I realize you write with passion and I like that. However, I also find that very often you come out very sarcastically and aggressively and this invites the same in return from those who happen not to agree with you. On occasion that has included me.

I do believe a good party is one you can fight with at times and where passion has a place. I do not agree with your suggestion that the NDP has one mind or one character -- it is a party where unity is often difficult to achieve. I have found there are people here who claim to be NDPers who I respect immensely while there are others who drive me up the wall with their blind loyalty.

As far as leaving the NDP to go to the Liberals because the NDP is petty and small, I have a personal reaction. The Liberals are the party that had Warren Kinsella go to Vancouver to buy dirt on Kim Campbell from her school friends- this was reported publicly. He did this after going to Dennis Buekert who was an author I was working with at the time and ask him not to do business with me because of a dispute I had with the Liberal party. This is the party that sent a letter to all their MPs and Senators including my own MP demanding that they not reply to me rather than address the issues I was raising (even the Ottawa Citizen which was Liberal at the time had to comment on that disgusting anti-democratic crap). This was the party that I heard asked local Ottawa bookstores to stop buying my publishing company's books because I had a lawsuit against them.

So if you are leaving the NDP and going to the Liberals because they are a party of principle-- there are many public stories about their vindictiveness and pettiness-- good luck.

I have another personal reaction-- there is a person at work who speaks very well of me-- but the support is so overwhelming and so overdone that it is embarrassing to me and I believe it hurts me in my job. I do not accept responsibility for what one person who has the best intentions does for me that in the end becomes very unhelpful and I do not hold the NDP accountable for the excesses or rudeness of each person who happens to claim to be a supporter. Fairly, I do not judge the Liberals and the Cons either based on that-- to judge a party based on a person, that person should be at least in the employ of the party if not the leader.
Put differently the person you judge the party by should be one endorsed by the party not a person who merely endorses the party. And if you hate the NDP because you hate me-- that falls into the same category-- I passed no test when I made my donation and got my card.


I don't mind sarcasm, or anger, or any of those things however, outright hazing and smearing is another thing entirely.

So, please tell me what is "new" and "democratic" about this statement:

quote:
Originally posted by Erik Redburn:
Cueball just has an irrational hatred for the NDP, common amongst radicals who never dare go as far as doing their own organizing or homework.

Funnily enough the idea that I am a communist, or some other kind of radical alternates with the idea that I am a Liberal.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Sean in Ottawa
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4173

posted 10 October 2008 04:54 PM      Profile for Sean in Ottawa     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Sorry Cueball why shoudl the comment be considered new or democratic and why do you think there is a connection between my comment and it?
I don't follow your logic since I was saying that the people you disagree with happen to support the NDP-- and I have met many people I don't like who support the NDP as well-- also a lot I like. I have also met people I don't like supporting the other parties and some I like as well-- I fail to see how a party is responsible for the politeness of all those who claim to support them-- you at times identified as an NDPer and soem of those times you were not always polite.

From: Ottawa | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 04:58 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Its not about "politeness." Its about completely contentless ad hominem attacks by people who niether bother to read what I write, or respond to it except to smear me when they know nothing about me.

This is the culture of the NDP as I see it: Contentless brand waving.


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 04:59 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
It's completely impossible to say anything that dissents from the NDP on this web site without some bullshit like this showing up. Why bother posting?
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 10 October 2008 05:00 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Well if you'd just switchover to the dark side, maybe they'd stop making your life a living hell? Just a thought.
From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
remind
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6289

posted 10 October 2008 05:01 PM      Profile for remind     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Bookish Agrarian:
T'ain't that true of almost ever board of every descriptions on the internet. I am sure there is some kind of bizarre hazing ritual on Barbie collector web boards and no doubt there is some of that going on on sites dedicated to discussion of flower arranging. It is the nature of the beast in some ways.

What you are speaking of is territoriality, and all humans do it, to a greater or lesser degree. And one does not find it on just message boards, it permiates society, which is why urban settings have enclaves and rural areas have a predominant culture. The physical territoriality that we live within in society comes along with us, everywhere we go.

And people guard their territory, or perceived territory, vigilantly, though on a sliding scale based upon individual proclivities to do so.

Now "progressives" are theoretically supposed to have an open territory, and be all encompassing. I would argue that it is not possible, to do so to any great extent, as the persons that combine or constitute the "progressive movement" participate from their own personal territorial affilitation.

Ontario persons have their own conceptual frame of reference, as opposed to Atlantic Canadians, PQers and BCers, as do the other regions with each other. Then we get down into regional differences and territoriality, which sets up a whole other framework of progressive actions being driven from yet another "territory".

All these overlap, intersect and diverge, while being an organic whole, at the same time. As such, I believe we over burden ourselves by holding a false belief that we are beyond "divisions". We aren't, other people aren't, nor we will any of us be in the near future.

It is a dream of social justice and equality that we are still working towards, if indeed it is even possible, seeing as how it appears to be, as yet anyway, an instinctual expression.

Moreover, some people use this progressive naivety, that we are supposed to be perfect "progressives", and above the frey, as a weapon. Why does it work? Because we believe we are failing in our strivations, we aren't and we need to get passed this false notion that we should be beyond the frey so far as to not be what? Human?

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: remind ]


From: "watching the tide roll away" | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 05:01 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Fidel:
Well if you'd just switchover to the dark side, maybe they'd stop making your life a living hell? Just a thought.

Exactly. You guys are just sucking the life out of this place.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 10 October 2008 05:07 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:

Exactly. You guys are just sucking the life out of this place.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]


We wanchya soul, man. boogedy!


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 05:09 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
What you really want is ideological compliance.
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 05:11 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Redburn:
Cueball just has an irrational hatred for the NDP, common amongst radicals who never dare go as far as doing their own organizing or homework.


Comments?


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
writer
editor emeritus
Babbler # 2513

posted 10 October 2008 05:14 PM      Profile for writer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Cueball, have you sent a complaint to the moderators: babble@rabble.ca? That's usually how it works, if you want the attention of the mods.

As I have stated, many times, I find this kind of behaviour shameful. I asked that a pile on not happen, but some continue to see some use in such bullying behaviour.

Shameful.

Shameful.

And please, don't waste my time claiming that cueball asked for it / provoked it. Tedious, unimaginative, lazy, and shameful.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: writer ]


From: tentative | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
Sean in Ottawa
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4173

posted 10 October 2008 05:18 PM      Profile for Sean in Ottawa     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:


Comments?


Why do you ask others for comments-- do you need us to say we are not Erik Redburn and that his comment was his own and that he did not run his comment past the NDP leadership? Do you need us to tell you what he said was not a collective NDP opinion? Dare I say there is absolutely no collective NDP opinion about you? What are you going to do when you come across a Liberal you think is an asshole-- go party shopping again? It is this idea that you want to hold people responsible for the opinions and behaviour of others how is that democratic.

I really don't disrespect your right to vaote how and why as you choose but since you are lettign it all hang out I'd prefer to see you do this based on the behaviour of the actual candidates not those who do not even live in the riding but just happen to claim to support the party.


From: Ottawa | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
remind
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6289

posted 10 October 2008 05:22 PM      Profile for remind     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
[nm

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: remind ]


From: "watching the tide roll away" | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 05:22 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I am talking about the culture of the NDP on this board, not the NDP party platform.

Surely such a comment should be rejected regardless of its source, that would seem to me to be the "new" "democratic" thing, because it seems very much, from what I can gather from your post that the "new" "democratic" thing is perhaps to distance oneself from the comment without actually rejecting it.


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Sean in Ottawa
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4173

posted 10 October 2008 05:23 PM      Profile for Sean in Ottawa     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by writer:
Cueball, have you sent a complaint to the moderators: babble@babble.ca? That's usually how it works, if you want the attention of the mods.

As I have stated, many times, I find this kind of behaviour shameful. I asked that a pile on not happen, but some continue to see some use in such bullying behaviour.

Shameful.

Shameful.

And please, don't waste my time claiming that cueball asked for it / provoked it. Tedious, unimaginative, lazy, and shameful.



Easy to say pile on-- I think this is a reaction-- I am not sure that all reactions are the same. My comments come here without any attempt to wound cueball here-- but to defend an attack against a whole group based on the behaviour of a few-- why do you think it is shameful to do that?
I agree some of the comments to Cueball here are unfair but lets not do the same on the other side that he is doing and paint everyone with the same brush. People are writing individual comments here because there is not a group think and we do not share identical thoughts. You should expect reaction when you post publicly and that reaction should be respectful-- some of it has been and some has not.

From: Ottawa | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
Interested Observer
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 15559

posted 10 October 2008 05:23 PM      Profile for Interested Observer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The point is that this forum should not be a place for those kinds of comments and it should not be tolerated.

Cueball was just amazed that nobody had anything to say about his treatment by Erik specifically and that nobody speaking up about it is kinda like a tepid endorsement of the process.

However, obviously some people had something to say. The overall culture here seems to think it's normal.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Interested Observer ]


From: BC | Registered: Sep 2008  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 05:24 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
posted 10 October 2008 04:14 PM its up there. Just gross contentless hazing.
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 05:26 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Sean in Ottawa:

Easy to say pile on-- I think this is a reaction-- I am not sure that all reactions are the same. My comments come here without any attempt to wound cueball here-- but to defend an attack against a whole group based on the behaviour of a few-- why do you think it is shameful to do that?
I agree some of the comments to Cueball here are unfair but lets not do the same on the other side that he is doing and paint everyone with the same brush. People are writing individual comments here because there is not a group think and we do not share identical thoughts. You should expect reaction when you post publicly and that reaction should be respectful-- some of it has been and some has not.

You have yet to make a comment on the statement other than to distance yourself from it. Hardly any kind of rejection of it, or a statement about anything, more of a kind of sideways "manouver" of some kind.


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
writer
editor emeritus
Babbler # 2513

posted 10 October 2008 05:26 PM      Profile for writer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Hello? Observer? I called it shameful. Is that too subtle?
From: tentative | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
Erik Redburn
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5052

posted 10 October 2008 05:27 PM      Profile for Erik Redburn     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by writer:
Cueball, have you sent a complaint to the moderators: babble@babble.ca? That's usually how it works, if you want the attention of the mods.

As I have stated, many times, I find this kind of behaviour shameful. I asked that a pile on not happen, but some continue to see some use in such bullying behaviour.

Shameful.

Shameful.

And please, don't waste my time claiming that cueball asked for it / provoked it. Tedious, unimaginative, lazy, and shameful.


Yawn is right. Whats tedious is people who let bully boys like Cueball roam free attacking others then allow him to turn and around and whine when someone calls him on it. His irrational hatred of the NDP is self evident, and if the moderators are going to be called in then I want a chance to demonstrate the actual posting history. A "progressive" site shouldn't allow any one party free reign, not when they use it to attack others. Fair is fair.


From: Broke but not bent. | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
remind
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6289

posted 10 October 2008 05:28 PM      Profile for remind     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Oh gawd, I missed it completely, therefor i retract that. I had not seen Erik around for ages.
From: "watching the tide roll away" | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 05:28 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
There you go Remind. In the flesh. Contentless hazing and smearing and insults.
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
writer
editor emeritus
Babbler # 2513

posted 10 October 2008 05:29 PM      Profile for writer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
One party dominates this site. Prove me wrong.
From: tentative | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 05:29 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Redburn:

Yawn is right. Whats tedious is people who let bully boys like Cueball roam free attacking others then allow him to turn and around and whine when someone calls him on it. His irrational hatred of the NDP is self evident, and if the moderators are going to be called in then I want a chance to demonstrate the actual posting history. A "progressive" site shouldn't allow any one party free reign, not when they use it to attack others. Fair is fair.


What party are you referring too Erik?

See, if I disagree with the NDP, its either Reds under the beds, or Liberal schills.

Really sad and depressing, and none of that has anything to do with any kind of politics that I want to have anything to do with.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Sean in Ottawa
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4173

posted 10 October 2008 05:31 PM      Profile for Sean in Ottawa     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Out of context how are we to respond to one rude over the top comment? I did not see that context and even when I do I don't always get in fights I am not a part of.

However, I am a part of it now when cueball says that this is some kind of predominant NDP culture that since I identified as an NDP supporter I am tarred with. Why is it considered piling on when I object to being associated with an out-of context comment I have no part of? And how fair is it for me to go very far in discussing that comment when I have no idea where it comes from-- beyond saying this is not a reflection of any more than one person's opinion from one day in one context.

Yes there is rudeness here but there is rudeness on the roads when I drive to work. I am not going to say I hate Canada and that Canadians are all rude because I got cut off in traffic a few many times too many. I can address the issue of being identified with individual comments and I think my objection has been on the right side of the line and respectful. You raise something like this you should expect those who do not agree to want to take the opportunity to defend themselves when tarred by association.


From: Ottawa | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
writer
editor emeritus
Babbler # 2513

posted 10 October 2008 05:32 PM      Profile for writer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Cueball, I missed that one. Un-fucking-believable.

Anyway, realize I got it wrong earlier. Messages should go to babble@rabble.ca.

I've sent one.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: writer ]


From: tentative | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
Interested Observer
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 15559

posted 10 October 2008 05:32 PM      Profile for Interested Observer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by writer:
Hello? Observer? I called it shameful. Is that too subtle?

Sorry my post was a bit subtle. Check my edit and added emphasis.

Respect.


From: BC | Registered: Sep 2008  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 05:32 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Its not about being "rude".

Its about being smeared.

There is a difference.


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Bookish Agrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7538

posted 10 October 2008 05:34 PM      Profile for Bookish Agrarian   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I'm still waiting for you to address the point that has been made about you tarring everyone with the same brush. You refuse to do that. When you do I at least will be happy to address the other comment. You see engagement in conversation is a two way street. Instead of addressing Sean for instance, you just ignored everything he wrote. The more this continues, in defference to writer, the more it is clear, you simply want to tar everyone in the NDP with the same brush regardless of reality or fairness. When you do that it is a bit too cute by half to not expect people to react to it.

For now I am back to my movie. God Harrison Ford is getting old.

From: Home of this year's IPM | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
writer
editor emeritus
Babbler # 2513

posted 10 October 2008 05:34 PM      Profile for writer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The aggressive, relentless joyful smearing is what is shameful. Just to be clear.
From: tentative | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
Erik Redburn
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5052

posted 10 October 2008 05:34 PM      Profile for Erik Redburn     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I mean one party, as in any one person or party in an issue. Now, are you going to stand up like a grownup and explain why your ongoing attacks focusing almost completely on one political party are just A-Ok, but members of that party aren't allowed to defend themselves? Please explain, or ask the moderator to. I'd prefer you stand up for yourself though.
From: Broke but not bent. | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
writer
editor emeritus
Babbler # 2513

posted 10 October 2008 05:35 PM      Profile for writer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
BA, sorry, you don't ask someone who has been hazed for days to enter into reasoned debate after you joined a pile-on.

Whatever Cueball might be, he is human.


From: tentative | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
Sean in Ottawa
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4173

posted 10 October 2008 05:36 PM      Profile for Sean in Ottawa     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Okay I read up thread more and found the comment -- you want me on record saying it is out of line-- Yes it is. Yes it is disgusting-- but I also feel the same about this:
"I guess I just figure NDP people can't take criticism. Nor do they listen. Why vote for that"

That comment you made Cueball first-- wave a red flag at a bull and you get bull back.


From: Ottawa | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
Erik Redburn
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5052

posted 10 October 2008 05:36 PM      Profile for Erik Redburn     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by writer:
The aggressive, relentless joyful smearing is what is shameful. Just to be clear.

Unlike Cueball's always friendly and balanced "critiques" you mean?


From: Broke but not bent. | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
writer
editor emeritus
Babbler # 2513

posted 10 October 2008 05:39 PM      Profile for writer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
A gang-up is a gang-up. And a group of people indulging in a gang-up, throwing baseless smears around *at an individual* is just bad, creepy, dangerous politics.
From: tentative | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
Bookish Agrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7538

posted 10 October 2008 05:44 PM      Profile for Bookish Agrarian   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by writer:
BA, sorry, you don't ask someone who has been hazed for days to enter into reasoned debate after you joined a pile-on.

Whatever Cueball might be, he is human.


writer this does not happen in a vaccuum. Cueball is constantly smearing others for their association to an organization. Why is that okay? Why is it terrible if he is given back what he dishes out? Why is it fine that he ignores what people post and then attacks them for their association and thus their contributions are irrelevant. That happens all the time. Daily from what I have seen.
Are others who take offense to that behaviour not human too?


From: Home of this year's IPM | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
Sean in Ottawa
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4173

posted 10 October 2008 05:44 PM      Profile for Sean in Ottawa     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
This is a busy site in an election-- I for one missed the days of hazing cueball suffered here -- and have not read it.

I would not have gotten involved except that his reaction was to tar everyone associated with the NDP-- on a public board before and election with a brush that not everyone could be expected to be involved with. I respectfully disagree with him.

I do not think people should be badly treated here-- but I also believe that the tone that is used by some is returned in kind and cueball at times you have been rough and have engaged in rough comments. Therefore you should expect some of that back.


the fact that I disagree with being tarred and the fact that I point out that cueball has willingly engaged in what some could call pissing contests here in the past does not mean I agree with unfair comments direct back at cueball. Still I think it does not let cueball off the hook in terms of responsibility to be polite to others or to engage in comment that does not tar more people than those associated with it.


From: Ottawa | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
Sean in Ottawa
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4173

posted 10 October 2008 05:46 PM      Profile for Sean in Ottawa     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by writer:
A gang-up is a gang-up. And a group of people indulging in a gang-up, throwing baseless smears around *at an individual* is just bad, creepy, dangerous politics.

Is there not a difference between a group of people indulging in a gangup and a goup of people objecting to a very charged comment on the eve of an election?


From: Ottawa | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
Erik Redburn
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5052

posted 10 October 2008 05:49 PM      Profile for Erik Redburn     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Let me explain the difference here then. Cueball and a few others here like to act like theyre only offering constructive "criticism" of the party, yet have openly stated before that they think the NDP should be eliminated. It's "useless". He frequently fishes for reasons to criticise, often over the most minor thing, and if one is dealt with he just comes up with another. Harrassment IOW. My statement may be a personal characterization but he continues to tar NDPers in general with a broad brush, or saying certain members views represent the whole parties view. Unlike Cueball I can at least support my statements with verifiable posts. If youre going to ban me then at least prove me wrong with something everyone here can see. Some characterizations are more accurate than others.

ETA: He also frequently insults others, even over minor differences. That too can be amply documented, by myself if given the chance (and he should have the *same* chance to documnent any complaints against me) if that is the powers that be here are truly interested in a fair "non-partisan" call. I haven't even been here much the last couple months yet the pattern continues to escalate.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Erik Redburn ]


From: Broke but not bent. | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
Erik Redburn
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5052

posted 10 October 2008 05:51 PM      Profile for Erik Redburn     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by writer:
A gang-up is a gang-up. And a group of people indulging in a gang-up, throwing baseless smears around *at an individual* is just bad, creepy, dangerous politics.

Who's "ganging up" on who Writer? Did someone start a thread going after Cueball or his particular favourite (whoever that maybe) or did he choose to go after others first? Balance requires seeing all sides of dispute before deciding. I do retract my comment about "radicals" though. It only applies to a few. I thought that would be self evident.


From: Broke but not bent. | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
thorin_bane
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6194

posted 10 October 2008 06:35 PM      Profile for thorin_bane     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by writer:
A gang-up is a gang-up. And a group of people indulging in a gang-up, throwing baseless smears around *at an individual* is just bad, creepy, dangerous politics.

Wow this coming from you after the 3 way I took on sunday ...Yeah a gang up is a gang up..thanks again. Funny haven't seen Alone 30 in the last 2 days. But I was the asshole that day eh.
When you call people out on something, maybe there is a reason. See this thread as an example.

For the record I have seen contribution from Cueball on occasion, but he is provocative on a lot of threads. I don't however see him as a liberal.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: thorin_bane ]


From: Looking at the despair of Detroit from across the river! | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 06:36 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Sean in Ottawa:
Okay I read up thread more and found the comment -- you want me on record saying it is out of line-- Yes it is. Yes it is disgusting-- but I also feel the same about this:
"I guess I just figure NDP people can't take criticism. Nor do they listen. Why vote for that"

That comment you made Cueball first-- wave a red flag at a bull and you get bull back.


Yes and this all began in the last Trinity Spadina thread where a made a point of the fact that I was disappointed that my mother was getting a "Green Party" sign, or any sign at all. Then I asked who the independent candidates were, and and some NDP schill came along to call me a "Liberal who hates the NDP", and I didn't even mention the NDP in my post.

And this behaviour of several NDP'rs (Fidel most often, then North Report, and Remind) calling me a Liberal, for many weeks now. Fidel has been repeating the trope for so long that North Report actually believes it I think. And this "Liberal" smear alternates with Erik Redburn "communist" smear that he picked up from JH. More recently Kroptokin started in on the "hatred" of the NDP schtick.

And this is the danger of the smear, some new guy like Erik, picks up on Jeff House's old commie smear, and then NR picks up on fidel's Liberal smear.

Could there be anything more bizarre? Being smeared as a Liberal, and then a Communist, practically in the same threads?

Moreso this isn't just one or two people but about 5 people offering up completely ad hominem nonsense.

Yeah, my experience is that the NDP'rs around here can't handle criticism, and when they see it they start in with the abuse.

It's just abuse.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
RevolutionPlease
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14629

posted 10 October 2008 06:44 PM      Profile for RevolutionPlease     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I wish it wasn't about parties here.

Maybe after the election..........


From: Aurora | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
remind
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6289

posted 10 October 2008 06:48 PM      Profile for remind     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
hey, I called you a conservative, not a LIberal and Old Goat even got the joke at the time, so do not bring me into this mess, I have not said a word in this thread to you, other than my not seeing Erik post and asking you where you got it from.
From: "watching the tide roll away" | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 06:51 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Its true you usually keep yourself out of the gutter.

And there is nothing wrong with the occassional knock down drag out arguement, but constant bludgeoning with the ad hominem, does not make me want to go anywhere near the NDP.

I happen to have some very strong opinions on some very specific issues, and because I voice them in opposition to the NDP position, does not mean I hate the NDP. It means that I care about some issues very much.

I have never belonged to any party ever. So just fuck off with my private business, about my private associations.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
RevolutionPlease
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14629

posted 10 October 2008 06:59 PM      Profile for RevolutionPlease     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:
Now there is an idea!

So Cueball, some of us NDP have tried to play nice but you don't seem interested?

How about some new politics?

I'm confused why you're continuing? You make very good points around the board but deman yourself to this during an election? It's kind of like walking around nude, isn't it?


From: Aurora | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 07:06 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Sure. Here is my idea for some new politics. Lets not talk about party affiliations, and instead talk about the ideas themselves. The only real way to make a difference is to shift the agenda overall, not obsessing about how many points each team gets.

Lets consider for example that more "social housing" was built in Ontario by the Progressive Conservatives than either the Liberals or the NDP. Go figure?

Why is that?


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Erik Redburn
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5052

posted 10 October 2008 07:07 PM      Profile for Erik Redburn     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I wish it was only about parties at times. Since Cueball has shown himself perfectly capable of responding directly to others before, and did I recall once defend my right to consider myself a leftwinger of sorts, I will respond directly to this:

"See, if I disagree with the NDP, its either Reds under the beds, or Liberal schills. "

I have never called you a "Liberal shill", and only once suggested you were affiliated with "communists" till you told me otherwise. (feel free to find otherwise) You maybe be confusing me with another NDP-leaning voter -nice try though. I'm not Jeff House, though I appreciated his contributions at times too. I do however believe you enjoy mixing it up -- at least when numbers are on your side. That is all for this, I hope.


From: Broke but not bent. | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 10 October 2008 07:09 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Numbers? What numbers Erik? Which clique are you referring too?
From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
RevolutionPlease
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14629

posted 10 October 2008 07:15 PM      Profile for RevolutionPlease     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:
Sure. Here is my idea for some new politics. Lets not talk about party affiliations, and instead talk about the ideas themselves. The only real way to make a difference is to shift the agenda overall, not obsessing about how many points each team gets.

Lets consider for example that more "social housing" was built in Ontario by the Progressive Conservatives than either the Liberals or the NDP. Go figure?

Why is that?


But surely you can wait a week for that???

Considering your normally conciliatory tone? Why the grump tis week?


From: Aurora | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 10 October 2008 07:17 PM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:
Well, its also a vote against you. You're politics are terrible, and have no clear principles other than some kind of odd party loyalty to a party which pretends to be from a political tradition that you disagree with, for the most part.

And all this constant "deflection" about blaming the Liberals, as opposed to answering the critique is precisely the kind of shit I dispise.

[ 10 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]


OK cueb, sign me up. It's time for a Canadian socialist party that doesn't include liberals like Stockholm.

In the provincial election-before-last, Stockholm and some other hardcore partisan Nude Ms (why are they on our side?) were so off-putting that I changed my mind from voting NDP to voting for the Greens. Luckily Lorne Calvert and the gang won without my support.


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
RevolutionPlease
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14629

posted 10 October 2008 07:19 PM      Profile for RevolutionPlease     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I wonder too why the NDP would not object to Stockholm's posts but he's pretty good at getting the poll's circling.
From: Aurora | Registered: Oct 2007  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 10 October 2008 07:21 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Cueball:

Lets consider for example that more "social housing" was built in Ontario by the Progressive Conservatives than either the Liberals or the NDP. Go figure?

Why is that?


We've answered this same question in different forms countless times before. And we'd field it again, but then you'd prolly pull us down to your level and beat us with experience.


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Bookish Agrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7538

posted 10 October 2008 07:24 PM      Profile for Bookish Agrarian   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Some of us have an ignore feature on our browsers and trust the moderators to do their usually capable job of moderating.

Although that this thread is still going is maybe not the best recomendation of that, but like they can be here all the time. I assume unlike me they seem to have a life.


From: Home of this year's IPM | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
oldgoat
Moderator
Babbler # 1130

posted 10 October 2008 07:27 PM      Profile for oldgoat     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Holy poop did this ever run long! Please don't anyone ask me to read it.
From: The 10th circle | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

   Open Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca