I mostly have. The few times I haven’t I have regretted it. It doesn’t exactly go like it does in your example. It goes like this every time:
-Nun posts some objectively bad take while preemptively telling us why he and his take are superior to whatever the topic is.
-People tell him why that is wrong.
-Nun blows up and starts personally insulting everyone who responded to him.
-The thread turns to unreadable garbage.
That has happened literally every thread he has posted in since he came back.
The larger question is should we as a community tolerate a poster who has by far one of the worst likes/post ratio constantly personally insulting people when you don’t agree with him. If one person is constantly ruining otherwise civil discussion that isn’t a positive. Name one other poster who does that? Maybe the people still going out of their way to bash Pete? At least that is mostly contained to those threads.
Well, I was trying to point out that perhaps the reason you fight like crazy isn’t because you’re opposites but because you’re quite similar. Many of the criticisms you’ve made of him here can very easily be levelled at you.
Understand that this is probably the same mindset that nunnehi has. If you look inside yourself and think about how someone should debate with you while holding their ground on a point of disagreement, do you feel that you are doing with nunn what they should be doing with you?
In other words let him spew horrendous takes unchallenged and he’ll stop being a condescending prick when challenged? No kidding!
No, but being wrong and never admitting it and refusing to be challenged on your record while attacking and ignoring posters who do so you can keep posting hundreds of words of drivel at a time… That’s toxic.
If nunn posts bad content in a content thread, it seems relevant to me for people reading it who haven’t figured it out to know that nunn is famously bad at predicting political events/strategy and that he has a long track record of such.
I never said impeachment was going to ‘work’. When you start to see how this lie has become dogma, you’ll maybe begin to understand why I have some problems with some people here who keep trying to ‘win’ arguments they claim I made but never did. It’s always the same people, always.
What Cuse has been doing the last two weeks is what Wichita did to me for 6 months despite me telling him multiple times he was going on ignore before putting him there. Wichita somehow coming in here claiming to be the good guy is so laughable I can’t even. He’s one of the most abusive and negative posters on this site, and you best believe he starts it every time.
Well the difference is that the points of disagreement in this case are facts. If somebody digs up something I was blatantly wrong about and shows me, I’m not going to call them names, explain why that’s proof I’m right, and stick them on ignore.
He’s insulting people who don’t flag posts that insult us is my guess.
What a coincidence! I did dig some up recently in the threads where this has been happening. Maybe we need a Nunnehi Is Always Wrong thread to leave all the receipts?
I’m pretty sure this is exhibit A and B for why your posting isn’t well liked. It isn’t well based in reality and it is chock full of personal insults. Address the substance of what I am saying but just quit with the name calling.
If only nunn would just let the bully beat him up, he’d have such a better time here…
Let me put it this way, I give enormous benefit of the doubt to everyone, but it’s the same bad actors every single time who do not have good will. Everyone I have a problem with in the ways it’s blown up in threads with them has earned it. Full stop.
You basically guaranteed the eDems would move on the Mueller stuff with Articles. We had heated arguments, you told several of us how crazy wrong we were. You never admitted it.
I don’t really see much difference between you and them from a structural perspective. If everyone arguing with you has earned your response to them, then you have earned theirs.