Political Crossfire Forums

airo · Joined: 31 Jul 2004 Posts: 2583 Location: Tampa, Florida

Objective?

Well, on average, members of the Radical HQ have larger penii. It's true. That means we're better!

social · Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2005 11:25 am Post subject:

Simon De Montfort wrote: This whole argument that our HQ has smarter people than you HQ is BS. Of course people are going to think that the crap spouted in their HQ is superior to the crap spouted in other HQs.

You have to come up with an objective method for determing the best HQ

I have come up with two.

The most active HQ and home of the PC debate champion.

And the Republicans win in both cases.

If you can come up with a different OBJECTIVE method for determing the best HQ please post it.

You may back the kind of posters who spout crap day and night, but some of us have a life beyond this HQ, and posting s**t all day isn't an OBJECTIVE measurement for the best HQ. All it measures is how much time you can waste here, i.e. how much (or little) of a life you have beyond the Internet.

As for the PC debate champion, I think it's quite clear that's not the measure of best HQ. (1) Judging the best essay of the debate contest was not, and will never be, OBJECTIVE. Hence, you can't use it as an OBJECTIVE measurment. (2) A single member of a HQ does not represent the whole HQ. You may think Chingu to be the best debater on Crossfire, but the fact of the matter is, he isn't, and even if he was, he wouldn't represent the Republican's HQ anyway, because he seems the only viable candidate you guys can muster.

social · Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2005 11:27 am Post subject:

airo wrote: Objective?

Well, on average, members of the Radical HQ have larger penii. It's true. That means we're better!

:lol:

anselfir · Joined: 16 Apr 2005 Posts: 22918 Location: ZzZzZzZz

hmm...
given all this relativism, i am sure a democratic vote would give a fairly good indication of weights.

Don Quixote · Joined: 24 May 2005 Posts: 1588 Location: South Ossetia

social wrote: Simon De Montfort wrote: This whole argument that our HQ has smarter people than you HQ is BS. Of course people are going to think that the crap spouted in their HQ is superior to the crap spouted in other HQs.

You have to come up with an objective method for determing the best HQ

I have come up with two.

The most active HQ and home of the PC debate champion.

And the Republicans win in both cases.

If you can come up with a different OBJECTIVE method for determing the best HQ please post it.

You may back the kind of posters who spout crap day and night, but some of us have a life beyond this HQ, and posting s**t all day isn't an OBJECTIVE measurement for the best HQ. All it measures is how much time you can waste here, i.e. how much (or little) of a life you have beyond the Internet.

As for the PC debate champion, I think it's quite clear that's not the measure of best HQ. (1) Judging the best essay of the debate contest was not, and will never be, OBJECTIVE. Hence, you can't use it as an OBJECTIVE measurment. (2) A single member of a HQ does not represent the whole HQ. You may think Chingu to be the best debater on Crossfire, but the fact of the matter is, he isn't, and even if he was, he wouldn't represent the Republican's HQ anyway, because he seems the only viable candidate you guys can muster. :clap:

social · Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2005 12:42 pm Post subject:

oneofthem wrote: hmm...
given all this relativism, i am sure a democratic vote would give a fairly good indication of weights.

We're not taking this seriously, oneofthem. It's all a big laugh. But if a vote was staged, the forum with the most members would win, becuase they'd have the most votes.

It looks as if we need another measurement...

Achilles The Myrmidon · Joined: 20 Nov 2004 Posts: 4506 Location: Hellas

A.D wrote:

Why, have you been into the HQ? Under a different username perhaps?
Nice try.Better luck next time :lol: :lol:

Otherwise you're just spouting ignorant crap, with no foundation whatsoever, but then again that wouldn't be so different from every, single other post you've done on this site.[/quote]Just read the list of the radical HQ members.Except five of them the rest (including you)are not what someone would call "common sense people" :lol: :lol: :lol:

anselfir · Joined: 16 Apr 2005 Posts: 22918 Location: ZzZzZzZz

social wrote: oneofthem wrote: hmm...
given all this relativism, i am sure a democratic vote would give a fairly good indication of weights.

We're not taking this seriously, oneofthem. It's all a big laugh. But if a vote was staged, the forum with the most members would win, becuase they'd have the most votes.

It looks as if we need another measurement... duh...
but i say that's the best measurement, so will everyone in my hq. and that, given the relativism here, qualifies for a greater weight than your other methods of measurement.

Simon De Montfort · Joined: 01 Aug 2004 Posts: 2204 Location: Huntsville, Al

social wrote: Simon De Montfort wrote: This whole argument that our HQ has smarter people than you HQ is BS. Of course people are going to think that the crap spouted in their HQ is superior to the crap spouted in other HQs.

You have to come up with an objective method for determing the best HQ

I have come up with two.

The most active HQ and home of the PC debate champion.

And the Republicans win in both cases.

If you can come up with a different OBJECTIVE method for determing the best HQ please post it.

You may back the kind of posters who spout crap day and night, but some of us have a life beyond this HQ, and posting s**t all day isn't an OBJECTIVE measurement for the best HQ. All it measures is how much time you can waste here, i.e. how much (or little) of a life you have beyond the Internet.

As for the PC debate champion, I think it's quite clear that's not the measure of best HQ. (1) Judging the best essay of the debate contest was not, and will never be, OBJECTIVE. Hence, you can't use it as an OBJECTIVE measurment. (2) A single member of a HQ does not represent the whole HQ. You may think Chingu to be the best debater on Crossfire, but the fact of the matter is, he isn't, and even if he was, he wouldn't represent the Republican's HQ anyway, because he seems the only viable candidate you guys can muster.

I'm sure you don't like my criteria because your HQ comes up short in both. :roll: If your HQ had the most posts and the debate champion you would be like "see we are so great."

The number of posts indicates two things 1) large membership 2) interest in the HQ. The Republican HQ doesn't really have that many more members than the Dem HQ but we have several times the number of posts. This shows that the Reps like posting in that HQ for various reasons from interesting topics to interesting members. What else makes a forum good? You can say the people only post there because they don't have a life. Which is weak criticism at best. But PC is here for people to read and write posts. If people aren't doing that not much reason for PC now is there?

The debate champion while it doesn't reflect on the HQ membership as a whole it does mean we have the the champ. It doesn't really matter if you agree with the results or not. And since the title can go to any member of any HQ regardless of size I can't think of a more objective indicator of an HQ's quality.

However Social your post fails in one essential area. You didn't even try to come up with a better method to assess the best HQ other than stating your opinion.

Protostar · Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2005 1:34 pm Post subject:

I vote Republican HQ. Since I'm a member that automatically makes it the best.

social · Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2005 1:36 pm Post subject:

oneofthem wrote: social wrote: oneofthem wrote: hmm...
given all this relativism, i am sure a democratic vote would give a fairly good indication of weights.

We're not taking this seriously, oneofthem. It's all a big laugh. But if a vote was staged, the forum with the most members would win, becuase they'd have the most votes.

It looks as if we need another measurement... duh...
but i say that's the best measurement, so will everyone in my hq. and that, given the relativism here, qualifies for a greater weight than your other methods of measurement.

What other methods of measurement?

social · Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2005 2:05 pm Post subject:

Simon De Montfort wrote: I'm sure you don't like my criteria because your HQ comes up short in both. :roll: If your HQ had the most posts and the debate champion you would be like "see we are so great."

The number of posts indicates two things 1) large membership 2) interest in the HQ. The Republican HQ doesn't really have that many more members than the Dem HQ but we have several times the number of posts. This shows that the Reps like posting in that HQ for various reasons from interesting topics to interesting members. What else makes a forum good? You can say the people only post there because they don't have a life. Which is weak criticism at best. But PC is here for people to read and write posts. If people aren't doing that not much reason for PC now is there?

I’m sure you like your criteria, because your HQ comes up high in both. What a fortunate coincidence.

As for the number of posts, they indicate, as you said, large membership and interest in the HQ, the latter being reflected in the amount of posting done per person, per forum. But how does this provide an *objective* measurement for whose HQ’s the best? At best, it provides an objective measurement for the number of posters and their relative interest in the HQ, nothing more.

Moreover, this forum is American based; it’s only likely that the Reps and the Dems have a higher number of posters and therefore higher number of posts -- the majority of this forum are American. Consequently, the only reasonable standard of measurement would be to create a mean average of posts done per person, per forum. But this still wouldn’t address the real problem at hand, namely which HQ is the best.

(But it's obvious that this problem is impossible to answer correctly, for "best" is such a vague predicate to use in a question like this...it's not even worth attempting to answer.)

Simon De Montfort wrote: The debate champion while it doesn't reflect on the HQ membership as a whole it does mean we have the the champ. It doesn't really matter if you agree with the results or not. And since the title can go to any member of any HQ regardless of size I can't think of a more objective indicator of an HQ's quality.

Did you even read my criticisms of using this as a standard of measurement? What you’ve said is merely a restatement of what you said previously; it doesn’t address the lack of objectivity in judging the debate, and the lack of representation of single members in debate contests.

Simon De Montfort wrote: However Social your post fails in one essential area. You didn't even try to come up with a better method to assess the best HQ other than stating your opinion.

Since when has it been essential to specify alternative methods when criticising the argument's of others?

anselfir · Joined: 16 Apr 2005 Posts: 22918 Location: ZzZzZzZz

social wrote: oneofthem wrote: social wrote: oneofthem wrote: hmm...
given all this relativism, i am sure a democratic vote would give a fairly good indication of weights.

We're not taking this seriously, oneofthem. It's all a big laugh. But if a vote was staged, the forum with the most members would win, becuase they'd have the most votes.

It looks as if we need another measurement... duh...
but i say that's the best measurement, so will everyone in my hq. and that, given the relativism here, qualifies for a greater weight than your other methods of measurement.

What other methods of measurement? any other not advantageous to the republican hq

curisz · Joined: 28 Jun 2004 Posts: 2104 Location: chicago

I suggest that the best method would be the lowest Percentage of Posts by Blithering Idiots (PPBI).

If your forum contains lots of posts saying things like "Ha ha ha I ownzored that guy!" and "Damn, my b**** mom is making me get off the computer" you maybe ought to worry that you're not all that...

Kindred · Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2005 2:04 am Post subject:

How about this for a measurement;

1. The most intelligent intra-HQ debate
2. The least amount juvenile posts (backstabbing posts, winging about other members, claiming ‘ownership’ of other members)

I think that’s a good criteria, now ask yourself, all of you, how does your HQ fair?

curisz · Joined: 28 Jun 2004 Posts: 2104 Location: chicago

A.D wrote: How about this for a measurement;

1. The most intelligent intra-HQ debate
2. The least amount juvenile posts (backstabbing posts, winging about other members, claiming ‘ownership’ of other members)

I think that’s a good criteria, now ask yourself, all of you, how does your HQ fair?

For the Independent forum:

On point 1, intelligent debate but in sadly small amounts
On point 2, practically 0

We would be the coolest if people would just wanna hang out with us, really!

Nico · Joined: 03 Nov 2004 Posts: 10827 Location: Auckland

curisz wrote: I suggest that the best method would be the lowest Percentage of Posts by Blithering Idiots (PPBI).

Indies win :lol: :lol:

oneofthem wrote: duh...
but i say that's the best measurement, so will everyone in my hq. and that, given the relativism here, qualifies for a greater weight than your other methods of measurement.

really though, regarding 'best HQ', it's more than a little moot as to the concept of having a best little place to talk [and p*ssing contests have a way of getting people wet :lol: ]

The important thing is that an HQ should be a break from the front lines and somewhere to swap concepts with your peers, and no flamage.

As for the best debater, it will be a team effort to some extent, and a winner casts a nice glow on their HQ, but it's still just a testament to the individual in the end.

social · Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2005 5:27 am Post subject:

oneofthem wrote: social wrote: oneofthem wrote: social wrote: oneofthem wrote: hmm...
given all this relativism, i am sure a democratic vote would give a fairly good indication of weights.

We're not taking this seriously, oneofthem. It's all a big laugh. But if a vote was staged, the forum with the most members would win, becuase they'd have the most votes.

It looks as if we need another measurement... duh...
but i say that's the best measurement, so will everyone in my hq. and that, given the relativism here, qualifies for a greater weight than your other methods of measurement.

What other methods of measurement? any other not advantageous to the republican hq

Damn you!

social · Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2005 5:28 am Post subject:

curisz wrote: I suggest that the best method would be the lowest Percentage of Posts by Blithering Idiots (PPBI).

If your forum contains lots of posts saying things like "Ha ha ha I ownzored that guy!" and "Damn, my b**** mom is making me get off the computer" you maybe ought to worry that you're not all that...

:lol:

Kindred · Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2005 8:17 am Post subject:

Achilles The Myrmidon wrote: A.D wrote:

Why, have you been into the HQ? Under a different username perhaps?
Nice try.Better luck next time :lol: :lol:

Quote:
Otherwise you're just spouting ignorant crap, with no foundation whatsoever, but then again that wouldn't be so different from every, single other post you've done on this site. Just read the list of the radical HQ members.Except five of them the rest (including you)are not what someone would call "common sense people" :lol: :lol: :lol:
I’m not even going to dignify that with a response.