forgot password / register

reset password

register

patrick.net

 

#misc


#housing #investing #politics #random more»
778,263 comments by 11,467 users, 5 online now: HEY YOU, mell, Strategist, WineHorror, WookieMan
new post
« prev   misc   next »

4
4

Patrick....I have an idea.

By Strategist following x   2017 Nov 13, 6:55pm 848 views   63 comments   watch   quote     share  


#misc @patrick We all want some kind of a balance between uncivil posts and normal posts.
Suppose, the moderator, instead of making the post disappear, redirects it to a thread just for "insults and uncivil" posts. All responses to insults, which are inevitable, would simply end up in the "insults and uncivil" threads. This way, everyone gets what they want from the site, and no one gets discouraged from posting. If someone does not like the "insults and uncivil" thread, they never have to click it on. Those who want to read or respond, will have there say too.
A couple of refinements will be needed, but if the concept makes sense to you, lets work on it.

« First    « Previous     Comments 24 - 63 of 63     Last »

24 errc   ignore (2)   2017 Nov 14, 4:36am   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (4)     quote        

Except it wasn’t politics then, it was Housing, and Thomas was often given the business because his position was that housing was on path to crash to 1970’s levels, and smarter people then him were illustrating why this wasn’t ever going to happen. It’s also the reason for some of the incivility, as some of us were buying houses at the bottom and others were arguing against reality. Is it any wonder why a certain sect of the sites posters became so angry? Had I argued against reality and stayed on the sidelines renting, while everyone else was getting rich with their housing investment, I’d probably be a salty prick as well, especially if I were the type of moron to never take in new information and change my mind.

And it’s the same reason why Iwog was so polarizing, he laid out investment strategies with reasoning and a game plan time and time again over the years, and halfwits determined to be against him had to watch time and time again as he nailed trades bigly, and they’d always look stupid for trying to fade him, while others that listened were making bank. Again, if I were a partisan moron, i can see how that would be frustrating.
25 PeopleUnited   ignore (2)   2017 Nov 14, 5:11am   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

I liked Iwog's investment advice. It had nothing to do with his polarizing nature which was by and large his ego and politics.
26 Strategist   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 14, 8:15am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote        

Sniper says

Very true. Go read any article on any news or financial sites that allow comments. You'll see the comments immediately dive into tribal battles, the actual info in the article is rarely discussed. Meanwhile, DC continues it's rape and pillage of all Americans, and no one is paying attention.


And it will never change. Why fight the tide? Just go with it.
27 Goran_K   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 14, 8:23am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (4)     quote        

errc says
And it’s the same reason why Iwog was so polarizing, he laid out investment strategies with reasoning and a game plan time and time again over the years, and halfwits determined to be against him had to watch time and time again as he nailed trades bigly, and they’d always look stupid for trying to fade him, while others that listened were making bank. Again, if I were a partisan moron, i can see how that would be frustrating.


I personally didn't have a problem with Iwog offering investment advice.

Iwog left because he disagreed with his NSFW pictures being moderated and then tried to get around moderation by posting politics topics under investing. He was abusing his moderating ability right out of the gate. I'm not saying I'm perfect, but I've tried really hard to be impartial and fair in the comments I've deleted or moderated (and it's not more than a handful thus far).
28 errc   ignore (2)   2017 Nov 14, 9:43am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote        

Goran_K says
errc says
And it’s the same reason why Iwog was so polarizing, he laid out investment strategies with reasoning and a game plan time and time again over the years, and halfwits determined to be against him had to watch time and time again as he nailed trades bigly, and they’d always look stupid for trying to fade him, while others that listened were making bank. Again, if I were a partisan moron, i can see how that would be frustrating.


I personally didn't have a problem with Iwog offering investment advice.

Iwog left because he disagreed with his NSFW pictures being moderated and then tried to get around moderation by posting politics topics under investing. He was abusing his moderating ability right out of the gate. I'm not saying I'm perfect, but I've tried really hard to be impartial and fair in the comments I've deleted or moderated (and it's not more than a handful thus far).


You view a personal attack on yourself as uncivil and you treat it as such with censorship. However, if someone you view as being on your team, attacking someone who you view as on an opposing team, then you allow it to remain.

You need to try harder, you’re not doing a good job
29 justme   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 14, 9:57am   ↑ like (4)   ↓ dislike (3)     quote        

Goran_K says
Iwog left because he disagreed with his NSFW pictures being moderated


That's a red herring if I ever saw one, and exhibit A in the ongoing indictment of Goran_K's practices. The preceding is absolutely not why iwog left. Anyone can read iwog's last few dozen comments and see clearly that this is false. What iwog protested against was that newly appointed moderator Goran_K, a self-professed libertarian, or lover of freedom, engaged in dishonest, arbitrary and tyrannical moderation practices, while attempting to hide behind a veil of protecting civility and making the #politics topic Suitable For Work.

BY THE WAY, my saying so is neither "uncivil" nor a "personal attack". It is a characterization of Goran_K's ACTIONS. In the same way as stating that politician X caused the death of Y people of Iraq through his actions, is not a "personal attack". If we cannot say that "person X is doing bad things" or "person X is being dishonest" without being subjected to censorship, then freedom of speech does not exist on patrick.net, and arbitrary censorship rules patrick.net. That is, arbitrary censorship by an omnipotent moderator and a gang of like-minded helper thugs that are more than willing to mark criticism of the moderator and his actions as "uncivil".
30 Goran_K   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 14, 10:01am   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (4)     quote        

justme says
All that exists is arbitrary censorship by an omnipotent moderator and a gang of like-minded helper thugs that are more than willing to mark criticism of the moderator and his actions as "uncivil".


Like minded helper thugs is borderline uncivil but I'll allow it since you had a point in the middle of your personal attacks.

The truth is Iwog did leave after being asked to not post NSFW material, and even challenged me to state an opinion on #politics about how I would treat his NSFW postings. I even tried to compromise and say we could remove the front page thumbnail. He found that still unacceptable and left shortly after. So while that may not have been the only reason why he left, he did leave shortly after that exchange.
31 justme   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 14, 10:05am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote        

The above is a complete mischaracterization of what actually happened. Everyone should go back and read iwog's last dozens of posts.
32 Goran_K   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 14, 10:06am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (4)     quote        

justme says
Everyone should go back and read iwog's post.


I agree.
33 errc   ignore (2)   2017 Nov 14, 10:08am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote        

Since when does Patrick.net have any need for being SFW?

You can’t be working and posting/reading Patnet simultaneously. Unless your job is to troll Patnet.

As an American that values the Economy, the last thing we need is to enable people to be avoiding their work at their job, to post on Patnet.

Get back to work if you’re at work

Or better yet, man up and make something of yourself so you’re not subject to censorship from your boss
34 Onvacation   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 14, 10:09am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

errc says


You view a personal attack on yourself as uncivil

Because it is.
errc says
if someone you view as being on your team, attacking someone who you view as on an opposing team, then you allow it to remain.

YOU have the power to mark uncivil and then patnet can become a place where people can share and debate ideas.
35 Goran_K   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 14, 10:12am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote        

errc says
Since when does Patrick.net have any need for being SFW?


Good question.

Start a thread under #misc or #patnet and tag Patrick. If Patrick decides NSFW is not important then that's what it will be. It would limit my time being able to hang out on PatNet though to off hours.
36 errc   ignore (2)   2017 Nov 14, 10:15am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote        

Goran_K says
errc says
Since when does Patrick.net have any need for being SFW?


Good question.

Start a thread under #misc or #patnet and tag Patrick. If Patrick decides NSFW is not important then that's what it will be. It would limit my time being able to hang out on PatNet though to off hours.


If it’s a good question, why not simply answer it?

AFAIK, you were the one who decided the need for SFW after Iwog posted granny in her bra.

Maybe you should be focusing your energy on working while on company time, rather than attempting to censor opposing points of view
37 Goran_K   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 14, 10:20am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (4)     quote        

errc says
If it’s a good question, why not simply answer it?

AFAIK, you were the one who decided the need for SFW after Iwog posted granny in her bra.

Maybe you should be focusing your energy on working while on company time, rather than attempting to censor opposing points of view


I decided it would be the case for #politics. But if Patrick thinks granny titties and Anthony Weiner's dick pick is fine site wide, then those will be the rules. I won't go into multiple threads making dozens of comments complaining about it.
38 YesYNot   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 14, 10:25am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote        

Goran_K says
The truth is

pretty much exactly as justme summarized it.


Goran_K says
He was abusing his moderating ability right out of the gate.
He didn't abuse his moderating ability (sic). He posted a comment in the wrong category, so that he could avoid you as a moderator. That didn't rely on his moderating powers, because any poster could do it. Although he disagreed with your categorization of a picture, I recall that he clearly stated repeatedly that you were unfit as a moderator for other reasons. I'll take you at your word that you are trying to be honest and represent what happened accurately. But if that is the case, it seems to me that your ego is preventing you from seeing the situation clearly.
39 Goran_K   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 14, 10:28am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (4)     quote        

YesYNot says
He didn't abuse his moderating ability (sic). He posted a comment in the wrong category, so that he could avoid you as a moderator


Yes, he miscategorized a post to avoid moderation. Your ego and bias is preventing you from admitting that he basically attempted to circumvent the site's rules and moderation because of his personal opinion of a mod, and was rightfully called out for it and the thread was moved back into its proper category.

Regardless, I won't debate Iwog's action anymore since he decided to "leave". He's not here to defend his actions or explain them anymore.
40 Sniper   ignore (8)   2017 Nov 14, 10:35am   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote        

YesYNot says
He posted a comment in the wrong category, so that he could avoid you as a moderator.


Wrong.

He started a Politics THREAD under his Investment moderation control, so he could avoid Goran, and moderate it himself.

Big difference.
41 YesYNot   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 14, 10:47am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote        

Goran_K says
Your ego and bias is preventing you from admitting that he basically attempted to circumvent the site's rules and moderation

No it is not. I admitted that he was trying to circumvent the site's moderation - namely your moderation. In fact, if you go back to the original thread, you will see that I was the first person to call him out on it. I stated that he was not abusing his moderator power, which I think is what you meant when you wrote 'moderation ability'. Now, you are mis-characterizing what I wrote. Do you even see the difference?
42 Goran_K   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 14, 10:52am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (4)     quote        

YesYNot says
No it is not. I admitted that he was trying to circumvent the site's moderation - namely your moderation. In fact, if you go back to the original thread, you will see that I was the first person to call him out on it. I stated that he was not abusing his moderator power, which I think is what you meant when you wrote 'moderation ability'. Now, you are mis-characterizing what I wrote. Do you even see the difference?


Okay he didn't technically moderate anything beyond his subforum (since he couldn't anyway) but he was purposefully trying to create miscategorized topics within his own subforum so he could only moderate post. Small semantical difference. He was abusing the system to try and keep things under his control, and he was rightfully called out (thank you) and then from there it was a quick path to Iwog leaving once he knew he couldn't have his own kingdom within PatNet.

You and justme are leaving out those details because of your bias and are recanting what happened dishonestly.

Both of you are letting personal opinion get in the way of the fact that Iwog was the first (and only one) to abuse the new system of moderation.
43 YesYNot   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 14, 11:03am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (4)     quote        

Goran_K says
Both of you are letting personal opinion get in the way of the fact that Iwog was the first (and only one) to abuse the new system of moderation.

I can only speak for myself, but I think that words matter, and it's not a small semantic difference. It's a substantive mis-characterization. For what it's worth, I believe that you are trying to be fair.
Goran_K says
Both of you are letting personal opinion get in the way of the fact that Iwog was the first (and only one) to abuse the new system of moderation.

You might want to reread that sentence and try again.
44 tovarichpeter   ignore (2)   2017 Nov 14, 12:52pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Very good idea.
45 jazz_music   ignore (2)   2017 Nov 14, 6:54pm   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote        

anon_62240 says
it's all irrelevant; the high and mighty want the average joes on both sides to fight amongst themselves while they guide us into our new lives as serfs.

You all seem to be in general agreement with this notion.

The whole game, our loss of republic, was laid out in detail recently right here on patrick.net and it didn't get much notice. There's even various proposed solutions to regain our republic.

It was a good link with credit to Heraclitussstudent, not one to polarize using dirty tactics to end discussions either:
http://patrick.net/post/1311802/2017-11-09-podcast-how-money-corrupts-congress-and-a-plan-to-stop-it
I recommend not only talking about it, but memorizing as much of it as you can.

Here's another link to talk about and memorize as much of it as you can.
CONVERSATIONAL TERRORISM
http://vandruff.com/art_converse.html
46 Strategist   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 14, 9:20pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote        

jazz_music says
anon_62240 says
it's all irrelevant; the high and mighty want the average joes on both sides to fight amongst themselves while they guide us into our new lives as serfs.

You all seem to be in general agreement with this notion.

This is Panet, not the mental ward.

jazz_music says
The whole game, our loss of republic, was laid out in detail recently right here on patrick.net and it didn't get much notice. There's even various proposed solutions to regain our republic.

He he he he he he. OK...How do we get back the republic we never lost?
47 Sniper   ignore (8)   2017 Nov 14, 9:42pm   ↑ like (5)   ↓ dislike (4)     quote        

Strategist says
This is Panet, not the mental ward.


Really? It's hard to tell based on some of the posts here.
48 Strategist   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 14, 9:45pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Sniper says
Strategist says
This is Panet, not the mental ward.


Really? It's hard to tell based on some of the posts here.


I really put my foot in my mouth there, didn't I?
49 NewOldUser   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 15, 12:32am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (5)     quote        

Goran is doing a fine job. When the Left loses, they turn to censorship. Didn't work here, because Patrick knows better.
50 jazz_music   ignore (2)   2017 Nov 15, 10:41am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (3)     quote        

Strategist says
He he he he he he. OK...How do we get back the republic we never lost?


Your question makes no sense but contains an awful lot of "He he he he he he."

You should listen to Heraclitusstudent's link, there are some illustrative graphics too
http://patrick.net/post/1311802/2017-11-09-podcast-how-money-corrupts-congress-and-a-plan-to-stop-it
I recommend not only talking about it, but memorizing as much of it as you can.
51 Strategist   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 15, 7:38pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

jazz_music says
Strategist says
He he he he he he. OK...How do we get back the republic we never lost?


Your question makes no sense but contains an awful lot of "He he he he he he."

You should listen to Heraclitusstudent's link, there are some illustrative graphics too
http://patrick.net/post/1311802/2017-11-09-podcast-how-money-corrupts-congress-and-a-plan-to-stop-it
I recommend not only talking about it, but memorizing as much of it as you can.


Corruption is like cockroaches and prostitution. You can never get rid of it.
Socialist countries have a lot more corruption, because the power rests in the hands of very few individuals. You think Maduro, Kim Jong Un, and Castro live as equals to their citizens?
52 Patrick   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 15, 8:24pm   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Strategist says
Socialist countries have a lot more corruption, because the power rests in the hands of very few individuals.


True, but it's also true that we are getting more corruption of our political system here as more power is concentrated into the hands of our oligarchs.

They can simply buy our laws with campaign donations and lobbying, and use those laws to ensure that there is no challenge to their near-monopolies.

Cash flows in, cash is used to buy lawmakers, lawmakers divide us with bullshit identity politics and quietly pass laws which ensure the cash keeps flowing to the oligarchs. Rinse and repeat. Forever.
53 Strategist   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 15, 8:35pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Patrick says
Strategist says
Socialist countries have a lot more corruption, because the power rests in the hands of very few individuals.


True, but it's also true that we are getting more corruption of our political system here as more power is concentrated into the hands of our oligarchs.

They can simply buy our laws with campaign donations and lobbying, and use those laws to ensure that there is no challenge to their near-monopolies.


I cannot disagree. This is why we have corruption. It's still less corruption than socialism/communism where they have very few people in power.
In our case, we have a solution.....campaign finance reforms, lobbying, changes in law etc.
We have the means to make the right changes. We need to strive it.
54 Sniper   ignore (8)   2017 Nov 15, 9:47pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote        

Patrick says
They can simply buy our laws with campaign donations and lobbying, and use those laws to ensure that there is no challenge to their near-monopolies.

Cash flows in, cash is used to buy lawmakers, lawmakers divide us with bullshit identity politics and quietly pass laws which ensure the cash keeps flowing to the oligarchs.


55 anon_4480e   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 16, 2:54am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

errc says
Iwog was so polarizing, he laid out investment strategies with reasoning and a game plan time and time again over the years, and halfwits determined to be against him had to watch time and time again as he nailed trades bigly


Iwog is the trader who only talks abut his winners. Remember his hyperinflation by 2017 at the latest threads? Or his gold to 35000 arguments? How about his peak oil, "it can only go higher from here" back when oil was at $130/barrel? OR maybe his "I'm selling my equities" call back in 2014?

Iwog is a gambler who reports his lone winners that make him "gloriously rich".

errc says
while others that listened


In the land of the blind...
56 anon_2bb55   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 16, 3:45am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

anon_4480e says
errc says
Iwog was so polarizing, he laid out investment strategies with reasoning and a game plan time and time again over the years, and halfwits determined to be against him had to watch time and time again as he nailed trades bigly


Iwog is the trader who only talks abut his winners. Remember his hyperinflation by 2017 at the latest threads? Or his gold to 35000 arguments? How about his peak oil, "it can only go higher from here" back when oil was at $130/barrel? OR maybe his "I'm selling my equities" call back in 2014?

Iwog is a gambler who reports his lone winners that make him "gloriously rich".

errc says
while others that listened


In the land of the blind...

Gold to 35000? Ha, that most definitely wasn’t Iwog. He was pointing more in the direction of 1000 and was reasonably on target. Can’t remember the others, but you can of throw your whole point under the bus with that gold comment.
57 anon_66fd9   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 16, 6:21am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

anon_2bb55 says
Iwog is the trader who only talks abut his winners. Remember his hyperinflation by 2017


Are you serious? iwog almost always predicted deflation as central to wealth imbalance.
58 anon_66fd9   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 16, 6:29am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Patrick says
Strategist says
Socialist countries have a lot more corruption, because the power rests in the hands of very few individuals.


True, but it's also true that we are getting more corruption of our political system here as more power is concentrated into the hands of our oligarchs.

They can simply buy our laws with campaign donations and lobbying, and use those laws to ensure that there is no challenge to their near-monopolies.

Cash flows in, cash is used to buy lawmakers, lawmakers divide us with bullshit identity politics and quietly pass laws which ensure the cash keeps flowing to the oligarchs. Rinse and repeat. Forever.


.....and you voted for the biggest oligarch there is, whose lust for illegal power is his only guiding principle. smh. he thinks the DOJ should harass anyone who doesn't admire the length of his fingers. if someone laughs at one of his cronies they get investigated and sued. he sends his brain-challenged children as ambassadors and representatives to other countries.....and you think that's not all pure evidence of corruption and plutocracy? a man who won't release his tax returns? wow, you really guzzled the authoritarian koolaid.
59 anon_13ce6   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 16, 7:44am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Patrick says
True, but it's also true that we are getting more corruption of our political system here as more power is concentrated into the hands of our oligarchs.


If money = power and we give a tax break that favors the wealthy (oligarchs). Aren't we just giving the oligarchs more power? Still further adding to the corruption. If Trump wanted to make America great he would make tax law that taxes the rich wealthy oligarchs and takes a "chunk" of their wealth when they pass on to the other side.

You don't extinguisher the power of oligarchs by giving them a tax break.
60 Strategist   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 16, 7:46am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote        

anon_66fd9 says
Patrick says
Strategist says
Socialist countries have a lot more corruption, because the power rests in the hands of very few individuals.


True, but it's also true that we are getting more corruption of our political system here as more power is concentrated into the hands of our oligarchs.

They can simply buy our laws with campaign donations and lobbying, and use those laws to ensure that there is no challenge to their near-monopolies.

Cash flows in, cash is used to buy lawmakers, lawmakers divide us with bullshit identity politics and quietly pass laws which ensure the cash keeps flowing to the oligarchs. Rinse and repeat. Forever.


.....and you voted for the biggest oligarch there is, whose lust for illegal power is his only guiding principle. smh. he thinks the DOJ should harass ...


You think if Hillary was President, corruption would suddenly come to an end? The negative issues you perceive would just disappear?
You got your vote, and that's all you get. Nothing more.
61 anon_13ce6   ignore (0)   2017 Nov 16, 9:04am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Strategist says
You think if Hillary was President, corruption would suddenly come to an end? The negative issues you perceive would just disappear?
You got your vote, and that's all you get. Nothing more.


I know I don't think so. But at the same time I'm not holding my breath that Trump will make America Great again.

Here is a question, when was America Great? What time frame are we trying to relive?
62 Strategist   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 16, 9:08am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote        

anon_13ce6 says
Strategist says
You think if Hillary was President, corruption would suddenly come to an end? The negative issues you perceive would just disappear?
You got your vote, and that's all you get. Nothing more.


I know I don't think so. But at the same time I'm not holding my breath that Trump will make America Great again.

Here is a question, when was America Great? What time frame are we trying to relive?


I think America has been great since the civil war, and still is.

« First    « Previous     Comments 24 - 63 of 63     Last »


Comment as anon_f02b0 or log in at top of page:

users   about   suggestions   source code   contact  
topics   best comments   comment jail   old posts by year  
10 reasons it's a terrible time to buy  
8 groups who lie about the housing market  
37 bogus arguments about housing  
get a free bumper sticker:

top   bottom   home