REEFER MADNESS!!!!!!

[ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞]

On a somewhat unrelated tangent, I'm not sure why you're always so quick to be so nasty to the guy. I mean, I've hung out with him a few times and he seems like a solid dude. If he's got some hidden dark side that's worthy of that sort of rhetoric he hides it extremely well.

Might have something to do with his constant sniping since the whole flyers thing, the most recent one being a "womp" he spammed all over creation.  Particularly nasty trick, there.  Womp in a mean-spirited way, post it all over the place (Coyote's thread, for example), and then if you say shit, well, you obviously have no sense of humor, right?

Hell, I'd have probably laughed at the womp if it was an isolated incident.

Might also have to do with some of his views.

Basically, there's two kind of people who hate me...Those who I wish didn't, and those who I WANT to hate me, because if they didn't, I'd have to re-examine the way I live my life.  Net falls into the second category.

That womp wasn't mean-spirited, and I posted it once. I can see how people took it the wrong way though, and haven't made the same mistake since.

I think all this "sniping" is in your head. I even mailed you a letter with my return address on it.

[ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞]

I'm still incredulous as to how you can claim the tactic LMNO is talking about can't exist on the internet, though.

How are message board debates and live interviews purporting to be journalism remotely comparable?

You can check your facts before you post. In a live interview you CAN be ambushed in a number of ways.

And then there's the matter of expectations. Journalism is expected to contain undistorted factual information, message boards are expected to be full of opinion and trolls.

It's like going to a waste management plant for a romantic dinner and flipping out about all the poop.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Well, LMNO's post is buried, and the question he was trying to ask RWHN is long gone, all in the furtherance of some Requia-esque fussing over a term which may or may not have been used correctly, and had nothing to do with the actual point of his post.

Well played, sir, well played.

[Phox]

Well, LMNO's post is buried, and the question he was trying to ask RWHN is long gone, all in the furtherance of some Requia-esque fussing over a term which may or may not have been used correctly, and had nothing to do with the actual point of his post.

Well played, sir, well played.

To be fair, Roger, RWHN already addressed LMNO's question.

However, that being said, the past 4 or 5 pages of this thread are more pointless and pedantic than the previous 40 combined. Which is saying something. 

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Well, LMNO's post is buried, and the question he was trying to ask RWHN is long gone, all in the furtherance of some Requia-esque fussing over a term which may or may not have been used correctly, and had nothing to do with the actual point of his post.

Well played, sir, well played.

To be fair, Roger, RWHN already addressed LMNO's question.

However, that being said, the past 4 or 5 pages of this thread are more pointless and pedantic than the previous 40 combined. Which is saying something. 

See, I missed that entirely, because it was buried in an argument about a reassurance that a question wasn't being argumentative.   

[Eater of Clowns]

I'm still incredulous as to how you can claim the tactic LMNO is talking about can't exist on the internet, though.

How are message board debates and live interviews purporting to be journalism remotely comparable?

You can check your facts before you post. In a live interview you CAN be ambushed in a number of ways.

And then there's the matter of expectations. Journalism is expected to contain undistorted factual information, message boards are expected to be full of opinion and trolls.

It's like going to a waste management plant for a romantic dinner and flipping out about all the poop.

So the basis of your argument is that people have no excuse to be ill prepared to respond to a question on the Internet, and therefore it doesn't happen.

[East Coast Hustle]

I'VE GOT 45! 45, 45, 45...DO I HEAR 50?
\

[ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞]

I'm still incredulous as to how you can claim the tactic LMNO is talking about can't exist on the internet, though.

How are message board debates and live interviews purporting to be journalism remotely comparable?

You can check your facts before you post. In a live interview you CAN be ambushed in a number of ways.

And then there's the matter of expectations. Journalism is expected to contain undistorted factual information, message boards are expected to be full of opinion and trolls.

It's like going to a waste management plant for a romantic dinner and flipping out about all the poop.

So the basis of your argument is that people have no excuse to be ill prepared to respond to a question on the Internet, and therefore it doesn't happen.

When it does happen, the responsibility falls upon the asstard that didn't check his facts before hitting the post button, not the person asking the questions.

In a live interview there's no time to try to prepare for unexpected lines of questioning and the blame obviously lies on the journalist who deviated from the agreed upon subject matter.

[Dysnomia]

This thread is like a big, red box, and you can put tools in it.   

  I think I took someone's screwdriver......

Why Khara, you are a dirty bird!   




This whole thread is moronic.  That is all.

[BabylonHoruv]

Well, LMNO's post is buried, and the question he was trying to ask RWHN is long gone, all in the furtherance of some Requia-esque fussing over a term which may or may not have been used correctly, and had nothing to do with the actual point of his post.

Well played, sir, well played.

To be fair, Roger, RWHN already addressed LMNO's question.

However, that being said, the past 4 or 5 pages of this thread are more pointless and pedantic than the previous 40 combined. Which is saying something. 

managing to make the tone of a thread on drugs sink lower, with a derail.  I think Net deserves some kind of troll award.

[Prince Glittersnatch III]

I'VE GOT 45! 45, 45, 45...DO I HEAR 50?
\

75 or bust.

[Triple Zero]

While this thread does provide much needed relief for diseased old men, it also hurts adolescent brain development and is a gateway thread.

[ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞]

While this thread does provide much needed relief for diseased old men, it also hurts adolescent brain development and is a gateway thread.

Well played.

[AFK]

Uhh.....what happened here? 

Also, FTR, I didn't think the original question was a "gotcha" question given the questioner.   

[ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞]

Uhh.....what happened here? 

Also, FTR, I didn't think the original question was a "gotcha" question given the questioner.   

LMNO underhandedly accused unnamed people in this thread of gotcha journalism.

I broke the story in a series of unflinching reports.