Monday, October 22, 2007


I gotta ask this here, so it doesn't get deleted.

3 posts disappeared from Lydia's board today.

one at 7:21 am, which I believe was Lydia's.
one at 9:16 which was YOURS,
and one at 10:50 which was mine.

ALL of them say "post removed by the author".

Only, I didn't delete mine. Did you delete yours?

I smell a rat. One named Worf.


Voltron said...


Voltron said...

The missing posts, yours at 9:16 am questioned Lydia over her "Liberals are the true Christians" statement.

(I think you called her arrogant)..LOL

I responded by quoting your post (quoting her) and adding her "sarcasm and exaggeration in light of Bush's crimes" quote from the last thread.


Voltron said...

Maybe I was wrong about what was in the 9:16 am post. But I know the post I quoted above is gone, and my reply as well.

And I didn't delete mine, and IF they did it, they made it look like I did.

Voltron said...

Obviously we are not to question Lydia.

Talll Texan said...

Volt, I've lost track of all the deleted posts.

Just a little while ago, Bart deleted a post of mine which I thought was quite conciliatory.

Sorry for taking up space on your blog, but I thought my words had some merit, and I figured they might be safe here. Hope all is well.


Lydia Cornell said...
Volt and TT and Freedom Fan (where is he?)

I invite you all to a court martial. Or how about a court hearing where we evaluate whether or not you guys can debate properly.

In the future, if we are to have right vs. left-wing debates, we have to abide by certain rules:
1. Listen to your opponent
2. Respond to the points he made with impartial and factual evidence to back up your points
3. Do not repeat yourself over and over in an offensive way.

All of us have to abide by these rules.

I would actually like to experiment with really listening to each other on a deeper level.

I am still perplexed: what are the differences between our worldviews? Aren't we cut from the same cloth? Maybe not, but we can respectfully disagree.

Can't we at least listen to each other's side? And take into account our differences.

An example: liberals have been maligned unfairly all these years by right-wing talk radio.

The truth is, we are motivated by our sadness over loss of life. We do not love the bomb. Why is this a bad thing?

Why does this make you label us "unpatriotic" to love America so much we want our troops home alive? Why can't you see that war is not cool, not effective and not truly macho?

We have broken hearts over how Bush and Cheney have usurped our Constitutional rights.

Can you see our point of view?

1:50 PM

Lydia, that is probably the most reasonable thing I've heard here in quite a while, and I totally agree.

We all want good outcomes to various situations that present themselves.

Poltical views may be subjectively right or wrong, but there is rarely a political issue that is objectively right or wrong.

We can all agree that one plus one equals two. That is an objective conclusion and fact. There is no debate about it. It is not subject to a subjective argument.

However, take the Iranian situation. Some people believe in all earnesty that taking out Iran's nukes is worth it. Others take the view that it is not worth it, with equal sincerity, and there are good arguments on either side. There is no objective right or wrong, no matter how stronly one feels about the issue. It's almost always subjective. For that reason, it's important to hear each other out to either agree or to refute a view one disagrees with, with a well reasoned agrument. These debates will speak for themselves, and help others to understand the thought processes upon which the position is girded. That's why we have campaigns and elections every two years.

On the subject of post deletion, there are some good reasons to delete them. Some of those reasons include gratuitous profanity, speaking of which, it is my considered opinion that even masked profanity is grounds for deletion. Is there really a big difference between using the actual word, or using the first letter and then gibberish before the last letter. If kids are reading this blog, they know what the word is, and they think that this is how adults should debate.

Another reason for post deletion is petty childish attacks that do not serve to flesh out points of reasoned disagreement. For example, one blogger here constantly refers to Volt as "widdle trucker." Does that add to the attacker's credibility? Does it add anything to the debate? I think not.

Then there's the occasional post that is a five hundred or more pages long that is clearly designed to shut down dialogue until it is deleted. There's another obvious criterion for deletion.

As far as my behavior is concerned, 99% of the time I neither use actual nor masked profanity. As far as personal attacks are concerned, I'm sure I've used them here, but I shouldn't have, even if others have resorted to personal attacks, because I know that I am better than that. These attacks tell you more about the attacker than the attackee.
Attacking the logic of someone else's position should be fairgame, because it allows everyone to evaluate each position in a debate.

However, if the person with whom you disagree with just deletes your posts because he deems them to be unpersuasive, then that is a Stalinist tactic.

In my debate the other night about the Plame name game, I took the posiiton that the statement of the special prosecutor was not Gospel, and my opponent kept implying that his statement was the "final word" on the matter, and for that, he deleted all or most of my posts.

I posted audio clips and images of Who's Who to advance my position. As wrong as he thought my position was, it was a position many people agree with (and it's also a position that many people disagree with). With my questions, I was attempting to bring out a crucial issue, but the "delete" key is hard to compete with, and is, frankly, is a cheap way of trying to win a debate (as if the vital issues of the day can ever be settled on a blog to begin with). He thought my questions were repetitive, and I thought that his continued references to somone else's statement were somewhat repetitive. Who was correct? Who really knows.

It was political discourse, and we should fight for our ideas with passion and courtesy, not with the delete key, not with personal put downs.

Again, Lydia, I commend you for being the kindest person here, and your call to settle this feud shows that you really are a peacemaker; and even kind, courteous and passionate peacemakers should be able to disagree agreeably.

Talll Texan said...

Trying to win a debate with the delete key is about as lame as it gets.

Voltron said...

Hi TT,

Yeah, it's safe here. And don't worry about taking up space, that's what it's there for.

Been busy with 3rd quarter fuel taxes, but I'm all done now.

Probably post some more by the weekend.

Hey did you notice Larry's latest addition over at LC? Now he's claiming a LIBERAL group is actually conservatives...

How do you argue with people who have no functioning brain cells?

Voltron said...


Somehow they got a keylogger on my computer.

That's how they deleted my post and made it look like I did it.

And Lydia has the nerve to accuse ME of using malicious programs.

Voltron said...

Looks like Barfy

Voltron said...

A good one from Mikey:

"....only a braindead troll could try to insist that Charles Prince, Richard Armitage, Katie Couric and Chris Mathews are all are one stupid ignorant motherf$%#er!"

11:21 PM

Voltron said...

How do you argue with someone who thinks Katie Couric and Chris Matthews AREN'T liberal?

Someone who thinks Charles Prince's donations to almost TWICE as many Dems as Republicans are simply "bribes"?

And liberal or not, that thinks Richard Armitage WAS NOT working against the administration?