by Terry 53 Replies latest jw friends
It is everything you have said and more....
We have every type here, the walking wounded, the unhealed and even the whole. The intellectuals like yourself....to people who are well....sad to say not that bright.
2,000-3,000 active members
2,000-3000 semiactive members
And thousands that have come and gone.
"Can we we all get along?" unlikely.....
Organized chaos at its best!
As tiny Tim said "God bless us one and all!"
During the waking hours the pace here is about a post a minute. Some boards go for HOURS between posts. People usually weighs in from a ton of different perspectives.... It's amazing to see the extremes in viewpoints on certain topics.
As tiny Tim said "God bless us one and all!"
I like tiny Tim, he's not like the emo kids of today.
-Sab
I have to admit that there hasn't been good in-depth discussions in the forum for awhile.
Maybe be the ebb and flow of whats occurring around the world that causes distractions.......just a guess
I do like like most of Terry's thread topics because they promote looking at things in a different perspective than the norm .
Some of my favs have been the character evaluations of some the more prominent people of the WTS.
such as Russell, Rutherford, Franz, not to mention the historical evaluation of the WTS. itself.
These discussions are very interesting for they do reveal a lot of what and why of this particular Publishing Corporation.
Well I guess this is a drive By because it's less than 300 words
but I always though a discusion was the consideration of a subject at hand
not how many words you use to get your point across. So with that said
I guess it's ok to be either one dense or pithy, in a discussion
Some of you are just too smart and intellectual, some are stubborn and opinionated, I tolerate that because I know that I am always right.
Time to de-rail onto the CRAZY TRAIN ... ALL ABOARD HAHAHAHAHA (as the prophet Ozzy would say)
1.Do you see a Thread Topic and read ALL of the posts before you comment? Or, do you jump to the end and have your say?
Depends on how much time I have at the moment and how long the thread already is.
2.Do you consider what the actual Topic started off being rather than where it may have derailed?
Both. Sometimes the conversation gets better as it flows off of the original topic, sometimes the original topic is better. All views are considered.
3. Do you ask and answer questions factually, with references, quotations? Or, is yours exclusively an emotional response?
Usually to the former. Rarely to the latter.
4.Do you care if there is a fundamental difference between an opinion and a fact?
I care.
5.Are your posts HUGE CHUNKS OF DENSE PARAGRAPHS THAT GO ON AND ON AND ON AND ON AND ON?
No.
6.Are you pithy (like Minimus) and to the point?
No, I am pithy like Mad Sweeney, and to the point.
7.If you had to characterize your own contributions to JW-net in one word or two at the most; what would it be?
Kick ass.
I love the diversity of JWN. There are intellectual discussions and there are goofball discussions and there are emotional discussions and any kind of discussion you could think of here. Different strokes for different folks. One sort of discussion may appeal to me and another to you at any given moment in time. None are inherently better discourse merely because of their topic or tone.
Uhhhhggg I drank too much coffee today. I think I'm about to puke.
I read all the posts on a thread unless the thread is really long, in which case I go to the end to see what the thread has become.
In the 10 or so months I've been here it does seem increasingly the deeper threads quickly water down to generalizations. And frequently become derailed from the topic at hand.
Even if a thread intends on an indepth analysis of a specific aspect of theism/atheism, it turns into emotional defenses of personal beliefs.
