Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

The cancel culture and its comparable historical antecedents

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • CivilDiscourse
    replied
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

    You are back to your old tricks. You made a statement here: " It takes people fighting against the pressure to cancel, pressure to fire, pressure to boycott, companies standing against the boycotts, etc. It takes people willing to be willing to "be the bad guy" in the eyes of many. And, it takes people willing to look at the behavior and recognize that it's wrong, and be willing to not give in."

    How does anyone "engage in discussion" when they have no idea how you propose to effect any, or all, of the above?
    Boundaries for dealing with HA:

    1. I will not engage in pedantic definition games. A request for clarity of definition will not be granted unless a good-faith effort is made to use context from the post and greater conversation to figure it out.

    2. I will not engage in lopsided effort discussions. When it has been determined that the debate style is going to be simple question responses to posts, no further responses will be given until such time as honest attempts with effort and discussion points are put forth.

    I reserve the right to set new boundaries as needed.

    If you need further reminder of these boundaries they will be provided as needed.
    Last edited by CivilDiscourse; 05-06-2021, 09:45 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hypatia_Alexandria
    replied
    Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View Post

    Set your boundaries and stick to them.

    Her last response to me was to re-word her question as a statement, but still not taking effort to engage in discussion. So, she hasn't gotten (and will not get) a reply.

    I suggest you do the same, it'll save frustration.
    You are back to your old tricks. You made a statement here: " It takes people fighting against the pressure to cancel, pressure to fire, pressure to boycott, companies standing against the boycotts, etc. It takes people willing to be willing to "be the bad guy" in the eyes of many. And, it takes people willing to look at the behavior and recognize that it's wrong, and be willing to not give in."

    How does anyone "engage in discussion" when they have no idea how you propose to effect any, or all, of the above?

    Leave a comment:


  • CivilDiscourse
    replied
    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
    It could also be that

    1) I'm wanting to see how kccd responds first

    b: I'm really tired of asking a question only to get a question as a response.
    Set your boundaries and stick to them.

    Her last response to me was to re-word her question as a statement, but still not taking effort to engage in discussion. So, she hasn't gotten (and will not get) a reply.

    I suggest you do the same, it'll save frustration.

    Leave a comment:


  • rogue06
    replied
    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post

    You'd be very unhappy with Jesus.

    Last time I checked He didn't only answer questions with a question.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cow Poke
    replied
    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
    It could also be that

    1) I'm wanting to see how kccd responds first

    b: I'm really tired of asking a question only to get a question as a response.
    You'd be very unhappy with Jesus.

    Leave a comment:


  • rogue06
    replied
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

    Well you asked a question of kccd , I presumed that you had an answer for it. Or were you being rhetorical?
    It could also be that

    1) I'm wanting to see how kccd responds first

    b: I'm really tired of asking a question only to get a question as a response.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hypatia_Alexandria
    replied
    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
    Perhaps you care to do more than ask the same question back?
    Well you asked a question of kccd , I presumed that you had an answer for it. Or were you being rhetorical?

    Leave a comment:


  • rogue06
    replied
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

    That is an interesting question. What would you suggest?
    Perhaps you care to do more than ask the same question back?

    Leave a comment:


  • Hypatia_Alexandria
    replied
    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
    So what do you propose we do with Biden and Cuomo?

    That is an interesting question. What would you suggest?

    Leave a comment:


  • Hypatia_Alexandria
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
    There is no meaningful parallel between a church following Biblical instruction to excommunicate an unrepentant member, and the modern notion of "cancel culture".
    In your opinion. However, the Rev. Dr. Schelin would suggest otherwise.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hypatia_Alexandria
    replied
    Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View Post

    Then put forth effort in the discussion. I answered one question, then you came back with 3 more. That's not a debate, that's you playing 20 questions. Offer actual effort on your part to engage with the discussion instead of low-effort posting and I'll get back to you. Until then, this is my last post to you on this thread.
    You made this statement: It takes people fighting against the pressure to cancel, pressure to fire, pressure to boycott, companies standing against the boycotts, etc. It takes people willing to be willing to "be the bad guy" in the eyes of many. And, it takes people willing to look at the behavior and recognize that it's wrong, and be willing to not give in."

    Elucidate on how you propose all the above would/could be achieved.

    Leave a comment:


  • CivilDiscourse
    replied
    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

    I responded to what you wrote which was "It takes people fighting against the pressure to cancel, pressure to fire, pressure to boycott, companies standing against the boycotts, etc. It takes people willing to be willing to "be the bad guy" in the eyes of many. And, it takes people willing to look at the behavior and recognize that it's wrong, and be willing to not give in."

    Which is all very "fine and dandy" but how precisely do you propose all the above would be implemented? Hence my questions.
    Then put forth effort in the discussion. I answered one question, then you came back with 3 more. That's not a debate, that's you playing 20 questions. Offer actual effort on your part to engage with the discussion instead of low-effort posting and I'll get back to you. Until then, this is my last post to you on this thread.

    Leave a comment:


  • rogue06
    replied
    Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View Post

    I'm setting boundaries. I can watch your pattern of simply reducing long posts to simple questions which require long posts to answer, then getting minor simple questions in return. There's an lopsidedness of effort in that exchange I'm not willing to deal with. It's not a conversation, it's not a debate. So, I'm going to cut you off now, instead of going down this rabbit hole, as was done in your conversation about police unions.

    If you want to have an ACTUAL conversation, put forth effort and make replies that are more than simply 20-questions.


    Every so often someone posts something that makes me wish that I had a sock puppet account so I could Amen their post more than once.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hypatia_Alexandria
    replied
    Originally posted by CivilDiscourse View Post

    If you want to have an ACTUAL conversation, put forth effort and make replies that are more than simply 20-questions.
    I responded to what you wrote which was "It takes people fighting against the pressure to cancel, pressure to fire, pressure to boycott, companies standing against the boycotts, etc. It takes people willing to be willing to "be the bad guy" in the eyes of many. And, it takes people willing to look at the behavior and recognize that it's wrong, and be willing to not give in."

    Which is all very "fine and dandy" but how precisely do you propose all the above would be implemented? Hence my questions.

    Leave a comment:


  • rogue06
    replied
    Originally posted by kccd View Post

    If a man in a position of authority over others routinely sexually harasses the women in his office and not only does not change his behavior but refuses to see anything wrong in that behavior, what is the proper response? Is it wrong to fire him or demote him to a position where he does not supervise others?
    So what do you propose we do with Biden and Cuomo?


    Leave a comment:

Related Threads

Collapse

Topics Statistics Last Post
Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
13 responses
67 views
0 likes
Last Post Mountain Man  
Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
52 responses
256 views
0 likes
Last Post Mountain Man  
Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
25 responses
108 views
0 likes
Last Post rogue06
by rogue06
 
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
33 responses
194 views
0 likes
Last Post Roy
by Roy
 
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
82 responses
338 views
0 likes
Last Post Ronson
by Ronson
 
Working...
X