Fostering a world of international cooperation. - Page 2 - Political Forum

JeepKnut · 10-15-2007, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by emptypepsi

What is the topic? You still haven't told us. What am I supposed to say to "Cooperation not Corporation"? Is there some aspect that you think we should discuss? Do you feel corporations hinder communities from cooperating? Is there something in specific that you think derails cooperation when corporations are involved? What are they?

You see what we're getting at, now? You need to give direction to the thread when you start one. Give us something to go on, to develop a thought on.

BTW, WRT to the right-winger statement: I'm generally thought of as a pretty moderate fellow, though Libertarian leaning.
W.E.B. (aside from some foreign policy) is a relatively moderate, slightly left fellow. If you feel we're equivalents of right-wingers, I'd suggest having a search through of our posts before forming such conclusions.

I have looked through some your posts and your profiles, how do you think I came up with my assumtion?

Sebelius for VP, not Hillary · 10-15-2007, 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JeepKnut

Thats succinct.
Ok, well, what about the topic. Isn't that enough go on?
I already told dubois that I'd comply and not freak you guys out anymore but he didn't tell you that.
This has already gone on too long.
Seems to me that It's 3 righties on a lefty about a Dem. candidate.

Yes, it's a conspiracy. Make sure that you do not accept responsibility for your failure to start a good thread. Make sure that you blame others for your failure. Turn this into a partisan issue, rather than accepting it as a low quality thread issue. That is the honest thing to do.

WEB

Diligent_d · 10-15-2007, 02:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by emptypepsi

There are no opinions because you put up a slogan and expected deep results. That is like me putting up a "Bush lied, Many died" as the OP and then expecting a deep analysis following on specifics. What is more likely to follow is nothing, or "Nuh-uh!"/"Yeah-huh!" responses.

You gave no direction for the thread to go in; no topic, to be more succint. Doing that might increase your chances of success in the future.

I actually laughed out loud when I read that.

JeepKnut · 10-15-2007, 02:30 PM

I've already admitted to that during our private messaging when I told you that I'd comply.
I just thought people could work around it, that's all.
I was thinking that maybe not having a long starting post wouldnt matter; that maybe the issue itself would inspire...............oh well.
I will try to start threads with dramatic opinion cause I know how you guys hate it when it's not done that way.

Sebelius for VP, not Hillary · 10-15-2007, 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JeepKnut

I've already admitted to that during our private messaging when I told you that I'd comply.
I just thought people could work around it, that's all.
I was thinking that maybe not having a long starting post wouldnt matter; that maybe the issue itself would inspire...............oh well.
I will try to start threads with dramatic opinion cause I know how you guys hate it when it's not done that way.

Seems that we still need to explain this a bit more. It's not about drama, but about posting something that can actually be replied to. Three words are not something which people can effectively reply to.

If this really is such a difficult concept to grasp, then I would say that I could just as easily go without any new thread you might create.

LessGovMrPrez · 10-15-2007, 03:25 PM

Weere you going to give us something to debate on?

I got lost in that first post and cant seem to find my way out of it. What are we talking about here again?

JeepKnut · 10-16-2007, 02:20 PM

[quote=W.E.B. Du Bois;93214]Seems that we still need to explain this a bit more. It's not about drama, but about posting something that can actually be replied to. Three words are not something which people can effectively reply to. [quote]

Well then...try the subject!

Quote:

If this really is such a difficult concept to grasp, then I would say that I could just as easily go without any new thread you might create.

If you don't like the way I started the threads then don't read them. Don't comment. I could not care less.

Re-read my 02:30 post again.
Here it is again.
"I was thinking that maybe not having a long starting post wouldnt matter; that maybe the issue itself would inspire...............oh well."
Do you get that statement?
You can't reply to a subject without being led by the nose. Don't you have any of your own thoughts on the issue? Are you dumb? Or just nothing better to do? Good thing your not getting paid.

You don't understand that I fully understand.
Your not very good at your job.

emptypepsi · 10-17-2007, 07:16 AM

Thread closed due to posters continuing inability to provide a topic of discussion.