mersenneforum.org - The infamous anything BUT "US DOJ Spied for Months on AP Reporters" thread

[QUOTE=ewmayer;342852] in my opinion, Cheesehead is so lopsidedly politically partisan that having any kind of reasoned discussion with him of U.S.-politics-involving issues such as in this thread is impossible,[/QUOTE]Yet you still have not posted a single bit of evidence to support that opinion!

What is the logical train of thought whereby the number of posts I have made that criticize the Obama administration has become an indicator of whether I have "extreme political bias" ... but this is applied to no one else? And is that uncorrelated with the circumstance that I value accurate criticism more than inaccurate criticism, that I value accusations supported by evidence more than accusations that are not supported by evidence, and that I have dared to point out where your criticism is inaccurate and where your accusations are unsupported by evidence?

Say, [I]does the number of your political posts that I have _not_ criticized (because I saw no obvious flaws in them) -- like, the vast majority of them -- have any relevance to this matter?[/I]

Are you requiring that I must have chimed in my "me, too"s in agreement with you on a regular basis in order to prove my non-bias? Such as garo tried to shame me into doing[sup]*[/sup] not long ago?

[quote]I've made it very clear - see post #100 - as to the standard of evidence which will suffice to change my mind on the political-partisanship issue.[/quote]... but not why that standard is a fair one.

[quote]Given Richard/Cheesehead's long posting history on this forum, in this case specifically long history of politically-opinionated posting, I feel my proposal is very reasonable[/quote]Is it only I who have noticed that you refer to my "extreme political bias" only after I've called attention to inaccuracy in your criticism or lack of evidence in your accusations ... or has anyone else here given that correlation some thought?

There've been, in the past, long periods of my having posted lopsided criticism (in the same direction as recently) but you never made an accusation of "extreme political bias" during those times. So I find your attempted "lopsidedly politically partisan" justification rather odd to bring up now, but not back then.

Oh, wait -- those were times when I didn't so prominently and stubbornly criticize the flaws in your political accusations as I have recently. That's the difference between then and now.

[quote] - and note that I leave it not to me but to the broader readership to weigh any evidence produced.[/quote]That's a cute gimmick, pretending that you're proposing a fair test, after you've pre-loaded the test against me.

[quote]Again, at issue here is not whether I think Cheesehead is open-minded on matters such as the scientific evidence regarding global warming[/quote]... because I haven't recently criticized your postings about that, have I? ...

[quote]- it is strictly regarding his record of nonpartisanship (or lack thereof, IMO) in matters of U.S. national 2-party politics.[/quote]Where was it posted that a nonpartisan balance in postings is required as a condition of participation in this forum?

Have you read my explanation in post #118 above, yet?

[quote]To that end, I feel using postings of opinion regarding recent U.S. presidential administrations and the parties they represent to be a useful proxy.[/quote]... and you make it seem oh, so reasonable, don't you -- to distract readers' attention away from the way that your basic premise is unfair to me.

[quote]The fact that Cheesehead himself is seriously considering my proposal tells me it must not be obviously unreasonable.[/quote]Hmmm ... no, I guess you haven't yet read my post #118, have you?

- - -

[sup]*[/sup] Here it is:
[QUOTE=cheesehead;310625]garo,

From what you've said so far, I think what you really want is for me to be a cheering section, posting a "me, too!" after every time you post about torture or extra-judicial killings/murders. You haven't given us any reason why you think my additional postings about these subjects would add value to the discussion. You keep dodging my requests for further explanation, so this cheering-section motive is the best I can come up with that fits what you've posted so far.

Do you think your own posts lack enough oomph on their own, so that you need someone else to chime in to make them more powerful?

Why do you ask only me for this, instead of trying to recruit anyone else?

You don't see me begging other folks to chime in on the subjects about which I post, do you?

- - -

Your suggestion that it's all to get me to "enlighten" myself doesn't add up. I don't see you making a special concentrated push to get anyone else to "enlighten" him/herself. Why only me?

As for "lack of curiosity", I've shown _lots_ of curiosity about _your motive in this matter_. I've tried different ways of persuading you to reveal your motive, but _you keep resisting_.

It's not my lack of curiosity or enlightenment that's going on here; it's your lack of openness about your true motive. Please just tell us what that motive is.[/QUOTE]Now, check out how garo responded to that post of mine. That's right -- go to that thread and read what garo posted after my post #29. (BTW, as you do that, you'll stumble upon some of Ernst's posts, too.)