Moderating the Sandusky thread: The Discussion

Need support or have a suggestion on how to improve the site? Post it here.
Post Reply
User avatar
docellis
America's Most Beloved Twitter Joke Thief
Posts: 24741
Joined: April 18 06, 6:54 pm

Re: Moderating the Sandusky thread: The Discussion

Post by docellis »

Kyle wrote:I am literally boiling with rage.
I changed my mind. Me too.

jim
Red Lobster for the seafood lover in you
Posts: 50393
Joined: May 1 06, 2:41 pm

Re: Moderating the Sandusky thread: The Discussion

Post by jim »

thrill wrote:I thought the disagreement in that thread was whether or not it's rude to impatiently ask people to read the grand jury report rather than posting things like "maybe there's some relevant info in that report I didn't read but I haven't read it and here's my opinion."?

Internet tough guy syndrome has ran rampant during this case. We all want to think we'd rush into that shower, headbutt the naked rapist, pick him up over our heads and jack-knife power bomb him onto the tile, but most of us would probably stand there in shock.
thrill I really disagree with this. You know the reasons we all admire those who go from bystander to hero in an instant? Because I think down deep, subconsciously, we know we are looking at ourselves and we like what we see. Human nature can suck, but it can be the most awesome thing in the world too. I really think the great majority of people would done the headbutt/jack-knife power bomb ... or at least tried.

imo.

User avatar
vinsanity
Chili dog truther
Posts: 8833
Joined: July 3 06, 2:19 pm
Location: Indianapolis

Re: Abhorrent child sexual abuse case covered up by Penn Sta

Post by vinsanity »

thrill wrote:
Kyle wrote: To condescendingly dismiss questions with responses like "you don't deserve to ask questions or voice an opinion [if you haven't read the grand jury report]" is pretentious and obnoxious, and is unreasonable under any circumstances.
It's perfectly reasonable to tell someone the conclusion they are drawing without all of the relevant information is invalid.
Relevant quote:
Not arguing with you, but do we actually know that he didn't? There wasn't any mention that he did in the original reports I read. But, there wasn't any mention that he DIDN'T either.
He asked if new information had been brought to light (by the grand jury report) that suggested concrete evidence that McQueary left without stopping the incident. It seemed to be a small misunderstanding of accusing him of not stopping the immediate act vs being complicit with the cover up.

It was suggested Fat was out of line to ask that question without reading the Grand Jury report. People ask similar questions all the time without judgement and some didn't feel the criticism was necessary. People ask 'What SS FA's are there?' or 'Should I get an iPhone or Kindle Fire' all the time (sorry Swirls) with out criticism and some felt this instance was being unfairly singled out.

User avatar
JL21
NPR & THT Contributor
Posts: 36109
Joined: April 18 06, 7:44 am
Location: Chocolate City

Re: Moderating the Sandusky thread: The Discussion

Post by JL21 »

Thread Levity!

Image

Ok, back to your regularly scheduled program.

User avatar
cards2468
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 14745
Joined: October 28 06, 11:10 pm
Location: LOVE IT OR LEAVE IT

Re: Moderating the Sandusky thread: The Discussion

Post by cards2468 »

JL21 wrote:Thread Levity!

Image

Ok, back to your regularly scheduled program.
lol, I can't stop laughing at this

planet planet
http://tinyurl.com/2e4x5hy
Posts: 24904
Joined: April 15 06, 6:25 pm
Location: St. Louis

Re: Moderating the Sandusky thread: The Discussion

Post by planet planet »

cards2468 wrote:
JL21 wrote:Thread Levity!

Image

Ok, back to your regularly scheduled program.
lol, I can't stop laughing at this
Me neither.

User avatar
thrill
bronoun enthusiast
Posts: 30535
Joined: April 14 06, 10:45 pm
Location: barely online

Re: Moderating the Sandusky thread: The Discussion

Post by thrill »

Kyle wrote:I think it's probably just semantics and I'm misconstruing what you're saying. And every time you try to innocently downplay and clarify, I'm misinterpreting it to be arrogant and stubborn refusal to admit you were wrong. I'm sorry.
Well you're not that far off base. I won't admit I'm wrong if I don't believe it. Neither will you, but that's your right and it's also why it's a compelling debate and I've been interested in continuing the discussion. I'll concede this, I do have a tendency to get really deep into semantics and I know that really drives some people up a wall. I can't help it though, I like really getting down to the nitty-gritty semantically.

Jocephus
99% conan clips
Posts: 64992
Joined: April 18 06, 5:14 pm

Re: Moderating the Sandusky thread: The Discussion

Post by Jocephus »

i think the difference as to why this was "singled" out is because with baseball news, entertainment news, etc theres a LOT of information out there regarding those things, lots of places you can look to and even be referred to.

with penn state, all we really "know" is in that grand jury testimony and a read through it can answer a lot of questions one might have. theres not X amount of sites with varying GJT info in it. theres only one "true" source.

that said, i think this is all kinda silly and i dont think stlouie_lipp was rude to begin with.

User avatar
haltz
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 22619
Joined: November 9 06, 6:45 am
Location: a proud midwestern metropolis

Re: Moderating the Sandusky thread: The Discussion

Post by haltz »

Do they have hospitals and ambulances in the dakotas? Kyle is literally boiling.

User avatar
JL21
NPR & THT Contributor
Posts: 36109
Joined: April 18 06, 7:44 am
Location: Chocolate City

Re: Moderating the Sandusky thread: The Discussion

Post by JL21 »

haltz wrote:Do they have hospitals and ambulances in the dakotas? Kyle is literally boiling.
I definitely noticed that, but didn't want to be THAT guy.

Post Reply