What qualities do you admire and not admire in an CFC debate?

[aimeeandbeatles]

To keep this a good discussion DO NOT MENTION INDIVIDUAL POSTERS. Thank you.

Anyways I thought this would be interesting and if I made a similiar thread before I don't remember it so don't be mean about that.

Perhaps this will lead to a nicer discussion on CFC. I doubt that.

Anyways,

Qualities I admire:
-- Admitting you're wrong (and maybe even changing your opinion) when you're wrong. This is a big one. Not enough people do that on here IMO.
-- Making your arguments readable. Some people are good at this, others not.
-- Making a post funny. Politics need more humor.

Ones I don't admire:
-- Being stubborn to a fault. I admire some stubbornness but sometimes it gets a little ridiculous.
-- On the other hand, flipflopping from thread to thread I don't admire as you can't get a clear idea of what the person really thinks. Thankfully I can only think of a handful who pull this.
-- Using a lot of long words just for the sake of using them. I don't like to pull out a dictionary every sentence to figure out what the person is saying.
-- Generalizations of "the other side" are never nice.
-- Quotewars. I think everyone knew I would say this.

So, for you?

 

[Ajidica]

Admire:
-Following the Miniskirt Rule: Short enough to be interesting, but long enough to cover the essentials.
Dislike:
-Beating a dead horse.
-exaggerating for the sake of the argument.

 

[Hehehe]

Some posts are just interesting to read. I like insightful and/or thought provoking posts.

There are a few things I do not like (note: these are not from CFC, they are from other forums)

First, some people are incredibly stubborn. I mean all of us are stubborn to some degree but some take it way too far. There was this one thread, where one poster, who just kept at it for something like 50 pages. Whenever somebody posted an argument, he *always* replied with a post that was at least as long as the opponents argument but was essentially a big nu-uh with no counter arguments. Whenever his opponent eventually gave up, finding the discussion futile, there usually was someone to pick it up. And this went on for something like 50 pages, mind you. And this was just one thread (he had other threads too but I didn't bother to read them). It was like this poster had to have the last post no matter what. Summa summarum, a man who quits even though he has not lost is a quitter. A man who doesn't quit even though he has already lost is an idiot.

Then there are some people, who want to sound smart (rather than actually contribute to the discussion at hand). Don't get me wrong, I like to read smart posts but sometimes you see posters who just wish to make themselves seem smart, and in my opinion they come off as pretentious, and at worst obnoxious. Posts from these people are built around dropping as many academically credible names (books, people) as possible, rather than making an interesting and insightful post with a few names here and there to support their post as needed.

 

[sophie]

Like:
People who know what they're talking about
People who are funny
People who know so little about what they're talking about that it's hilarious
Skillful trolls

Don't Like:
People who think they know what they're talking about but don't really, and continue talking anyway
Bad trolls
Incoherent posters

 

[squall78]

likes: Short and to the point
interesting
pics to support
pie graphs

dislikes: TLDR
thread derailments
facts without sources
TLDR
no cliff notes

 

[Skwink]

Dislikes

tl;dr

You guys who spend a month arguing about a subject only to argue the exact same things the next month on the subject.

People who are serious

 

[Crezth]

I admire the honesty and how forthright everybody is. I also like how everyone is always on the same page and that logical inconsistencies are unheard of.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

Would any mods like to post? I'd like to see what the mods say (other than "not breaking any rules" obviously )
Edit: Ex-moderators count too!

 

[Syterion]

People aren't willing enough to troll people or posts who deserve it. That's annoying.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

People aren't willing enough to troll people or posts who deserve it. That's annoying.

They will g et infracted for trolling and most people don't like a tempban.

 

[Bugfatty300]

In a quote war, I hate it when someone completely drops one aspect of the debate. I can only presume it's just a lazy/cowardly way of conceding that I'm right about that particular point without actually admitting it. Then after some time passes the same poster will write up the same argument as before as if our debate had never happened.

So, what else...

I admire it when a poster is less knowledgeable than me about the topic at hand.

I admire it when they just give up before I do the same.

I admire a poster who admits that I'm right and they were wrong.

 

[Smellincoffee]

So, what else...

I admire it when a poster is less knowledgeable than me about the topic at hand.

You mean if they admit ignorance in a subject, instead of pretending to know everything?

 

[Quackers]

I like posters who have an indepth knowledge of the topic at hand and can write interesting, well written analysis. Thats always good.
I like amusing posts.
I like X nationalist's posts and all the jeering by other users.
I like well placed memes.

I dislike posts which expouse a provocautive belief and do nothing to elaborate on it. It's useless.
I dislike rudeness.
I dislike over the top hyperbole. (Except when i do it ;p).

 

[Bugfatty300]

You mean if they admit ignorance in a subject, instead of pretending to know everything?

No, because that's usually the end of the debate.

 

[JollyRoger]

People aren't willing enough to troll people or posts who deserve it. That's annoying.

The willingness is there, but it now must be very subtle - often so subtle that the target of the trolling misses it - which takes away most of the fun.

 

[azzaman333]

I dislike people who...

• always post about the same topics
• consistently derail threads to argue the same topic, especially when the topic is completely irrelevant to the original topic
• constantly post threads about themselves
• use an extremely shallow thread idea as an excuse to promote something
• believe themselves to be intellectuals

 

[madviking]

They will g et infracted for trolling and most people don't like a tempban.

Wait. So you're telling those points on my profile aren't good? Damn I've been doing this CFC thing wrong for six years.

Like:
- Owen, Dachs, and awesome guys (and girls)
- People who can make me laugh
- People who can make me learn

Dislike:
- Butthurt people
- Anal people
- Smartasses

 

[JollyRoger]

It's better to be a smartass than a dumbass.

 

[madviking]

It's better to be a smartass than a dumbass.

The ease of making fun of dumbasses makes it not so bad. Smartasses, on the other hand, they just don't know when to stop. x_x

 

[squall78]

It's better to be a smartass than a dumbass.

actually it's spelled dumass. there's no b.