Ron Paul delegates are not allowed to vote on Texas Straw Poll

[Ferre]

I guess that's the difference between you and me, I fail to see how giving red rep could possibly be of any benefit in a political debate, you, at the other hand, dwell in your power to give people red bars, insult them and twist their words all in order to "prove" your point. Here in my parts of the woods we call that bullying and I'm not that sort of person.

Like you gave him some more red just to "impress" me (and maybe others), and I'm not impressed John. I think it's rather childish.

[John Scott]

I fail to see how giving red rep could possibly be of any benefit in a political debate

Red red lets the poster know that he is posting in a style that is not acceptable. In this case, posting obvious falsehoods as accepted fact. I do not like lies on this forum, and if you don't share that priority, maybe you shouldn't be in a leadership position.

Like you gave him some more red just to "impress" me

You can either quote where I posted that I was giving red to impress you, or you can refrain from posting again.

[Ferre]

You don't need to post that you did that to impress me, you clearly did. You allready gave him red and because of my comments you stated;

Originally Posted by John Scott

Hell yeah. Looking at his red bar, it seems a bit "incomplete".

*Going off to finish the job*

Rather childish. showing off that you CAN do that. if that's not meant to display power (to impress) what was the purpose?

And stop treathening me with posting John, it's another display of childish abuse of power.

[John Scott]

showing off that you CAN do that

Showing off? What's showing off? You asked if I gave him red, and my answering is showing off?

Who the hell shows off that they can put red color on a website? Does it take a special skill? Does it take a special power? Showing off involves showing people a special skill that requires an investment of time, training, etc. Putting a red color on a website is not showing off.

Your judgment is extremely poor, Ferre. It's pretty much psycho. This is way beyond the point of accusing the CIA of engineering 9-11.

[zibblu]

Originally Posted by John Scott

I would ask you what makes you think that anybody is voting down his rep on the basis of political views, but then that would require thinking.

As far as I can see, his rep was voted down for how he posts, not the point of view he posts from.

Too much common sense for a conspiracy theorist like yourself?

I realize you run this joint and you can do whatever you want. But if anyone were to receive red "rep" for HOW he posts it would be YOU. You are extremely rude. I would never red rep someone just for having different views than me even if they repeatedly call me "stupid" (which you have done not only to me but to everyone who posts anything with a liberal viewpoint.) I personally only use red rep for spammers and scam artists - it seems to me that on a webmaster forum that's who it should be saved for.

I'm done with this place. You sir, are pathetic. I hope you enjoy your power mongering.

I'll be doing real business over at DP.

[South]

Speaking of Ron Paul, did he freak out anybody other than me at the debates last night?

[Bernard]

When did Google Trends start showing data up to the current month? I thought they always showed data 3 months behind the current date. Anyway, I thought the disparity between news mentions and search volume amongst the GOP candidates was interesting:

Ron Paul, Fred Thompson, Rudy Guiliani, Mitt Romney Google trend

You can add or subtract candidates as you like. I didn't include them all mostly because I was too lazy to copy and paste every candidate's name.

[John Scott]

Originally Posted by zibblu

But if anyone were to receive red "rep" for HOW he posts it would be YOU. You are extremely rude.

Rudeness is not against the rules.

Originally Posted by zibblu

I would never red rep someone just for having different views than me

Neither would I. Who do you think made Ferre a Super Mod? You think I would do that if I wanted to silence opposing viewpoints? Get over yourself.

Originally Posted by zibblu

I personally only use red rep for spammers and scam artists - it seems to me that on a webmaster forum that's who it should be saved for.

To each his own. As admin here, I prefer to use negative rep to warn the poster, and others reading, that the posting style is not acceptable. As such, I apply negative rep to dishonest posters, scammers, people who misrepresent the words of others, or otherwise act unethically.

Rudeness? Nope. Politeness is not required. Common sense and honesty are.

[krahmaan]

Ferre,

Here's some news on Ron Paul and his supporters. I was looking at how many supporters he held at MySpace compared with some of the other candidates. Ron held 60,000 friends supporting him compared with Hilary's 50,000.

But I also checked out Barrack's as well. Unfortunately, he held more supporters than Ron and Hilary combined. A whopping 170,000! I couldn't believe it and I'm of African descent and still will not be voting for him. Why? Because I respect what Ron wants to do for this country.

We could use someone with some nuts -pardon my french. But someone with sheer guts will be necessary for these time periods.

Even if Obama wins I'm still voting for Ron, the election will probably get fixed anyhow. Hopefully all the votes will be counted so this will be a fair match. Unlikely though.



K. Rahmaan

[John Scott]

I think young people will support Barrack more, and those are the same young people who are online and on myspace. So, I really wouldn't recommend using myspace popularity to gauge general popularity.

[robert s.]

Originally Posted by krahmaan

Ferre,

Here's some news on Ron Paul and his supporters. I was looking at how many supporters he held at MySpace compared with some of the other candidates. Ron held 60,000 friends supporting him compared with Hilary's 50,000.

But I also checked out Barrack's as well. Unfortunately, he held more supporters than Ron and Hilary combined. A whopping 170,000! I couldn't believe it and I'm of African descent and still will not be voting for him. Why? Because I respect what Ron wants to do for this country.

We could use someone with some nuts -pardon my french. But someone with sheer guts will be necessary for these time periods.

Even if Obama wins I'm still voting for Ron, the election will probably get fixed anyhow. Hopefully all the votes will be counted so this will be a fair match. Unlikely though.



K. Rahmaan

am i the only one, who finds it a bit frightening that an us-citizen takes it as a given that the election for president of the USA, will be "fixed"?? we may like it or not, the US is the most powerful nation on the planet and I would feel safer, if i could be sure that the president gets elected in a real democratic process!

[John Scott]

am i the only one, who finds it a bit frightening that an us-citizen takes it as a given that the election for president of the USA, will be "fixed"??

Yes. Most of us take it as a given that there will be plenty of conspiracy theorists claiming that the election is fixed, and we pay no heed.

[krahmaan]

robert s.

Look to the original thread. The delegates for Ron Paul were turned away. Why???

I feel they were turned away because of fear that Ron Paul may actually win the 2008 election. He has plenty of supporters, from many backgrounds. So just these handful being turned away is a signal of a 'fixed' election.

I just hope that the perpetrators are exposed, then America can start to rebuild this great nation into far greater nation than it ever was.

Go Ron Paul 2008!

[John Scott]

The delegates for Ron Paul were turned away. Why???

Because they were not official delegates?

[sitetutor]

Originally Posted by John Scott

I think young people will support Barrack more,

Of course, MTV makes sure of that.