JCC Strong disagreement makes for livelier threads. Prove me wrong

I think strong (but polite) disagreement makes for the most lively threads. Do you agree or disagree?

 

I agree when I'm reading a thread, not when someone does it to me. And usually they don't know what the **** they are talking about lol.

 

This was the liveliest (and best) thread I ever saw on these boards, mostly because we were all enlightened and in agreement with each other on the topic. Anyone who wasn't, well, they weren't allowed to post. We loved sharing our ideas, growing our conceptions and congratulating our insights. It was too sweet to survive and too dangerous to be left alive.

 

Well I certainly know what that feels like!

 

Yes, but only if literally everyone disagrees with the thread maker. Such as:

https://boards.theforce.net/threads/am-i-too-nice-or-just-plain-stupid.50007810/
https://boards.theforce.net/threads/the-term-fanboy-is-derogatory.50013837/
https://boards.theforce.net/threads/marrying-a-french-farm-girl.50055974/

 

The most active threads are the senate threads with the largest numbers of trolls.

 

one troll seems to amplify posting in a thread by about 5-10 fold, two seems to kind of mellow things out, and once it gets to three the mods usually step in. This is the trolling "Rule of Two"

 

NO!!!!!!!!!!!

 

I think time difference is a factor here. I'm ahead of nearly everyone, and I usually get replies from people just as I'm going to bed. If those replies are adverse, then I'm very likely not going to reply to them. I want to go to sleep after all.

That doesn't mean I haven't got a come back to those posts, I often just cannot be bothered. But equally, it can mean that I see a disagreement that makes me think of flat-earther-type arguments, and I'm seriously not going to waste my time, even if it's during the middle of the day.

So, anything I'm involved in rarely gets lively, because the back and forths between other posters can be mind-numbingly tedious, so I cannot imagine how boring others would find it if I argued with anyone, even on the occasions where I have been misrepresented, or the other person simply doesn't know what they are talking about.

 

Thank you for proving my point!

 

But isn't Quigonmike, quite....gone?

 

Mike was banned? Since when?

 

This is how most JCC disagreements appear to me:

 

The trick is to have new trolls at different times rather than saturating the thread with several trolls all at once.

 

I'm looking forward to the paper on JCC Troll Theory.

 

I don't know, a week ago maybe? After he got banned from the Pandemic thread it was only a matter of time. He kept trying to bring up his conspiracy theories on COVID in other threads, and he eventually went too far.

 

If it was it was not a permaban. Just double checked. Man I have really not been paying attention

 

Everyone knows that the lizard-people who live at the center of the Earth, are behind the Covid pandemic. It's the first step in their efforts to repopulate the surface world. Al Gore is their advance scout.

 

**** off.

 

Here we go, argument time:

Which is the better movie?

Shrek or Shrek 2?

 

The Holy Roman Empire was neither holy nor Roman nor an empire. Discuss.

 

Paul H. Wilson makes an effective case that, insofar as in the medieval era subservience was largely based around the idea of leadership rather than direct control, the HRE was certainly an empire, and as the coronation of an Emperor proper was continuously under the jurisdiction of the papacy and perceptually distinguished (if not effectively distinguished) from that of King of Germany, it was also “Holy Roman” in the sense that it derived its legitimacy from a holy order ostensibly based in Rome.

Voltaire’s formulation, typical of enlightenment philosophical works, back projects his definitions and then criticizes historical models for failing to live up to ahistorical standards.