Would you like it if DU set up a "debate thread" with Freepers?

[kuozzman]

Poll question: Would you like it if DU set up a "debate thread" with Freepers?

I'm not even sure if this is possible? But I strongly fell that I and most DUers are "right" about many things regarding political issues. I simply don't understand how Republicans can ignore facts that point out the long list of lies and corruption in the Bush Administration. You can be pro-life or pro-choice or for/against gay marriage, but how can you support, for example, appointing to AG, the man who co-authored the laws allowing us to torture POWs or not realize that most of what Bush says is a lie, no matter how you look at it, etc., etc.,

I've "converted" some of my Republican friends, by simply showing them info about election fraud, or the 9/11 timeline, or the PNAC, ties to corporate corruption, etc. While some just refuse to accept reality, I think others simply have no idea about some things.

[Mistress Quickly]

1. No, I don't think it would be constructive

I think many times it would devolve into a bunch of name-calling and fit-pitching.

IMHO.

[aden_nak]

2. When I want "OMFG u r so stoopid!!!!11" threads, I read videogame forums.

[Ganja Ninja]

3. Yahoo already has a board set up for that.

Why waste bandwith so freepers can come here and flame us?

[American Tragedy]

4. Some interaction might be interesting once in a while

I sometimes enjoy thrashing it out with disruptors, which is why I've never clicked alert.

[moggie12]

5. We're not going to change any freeper minds,

so why bother?? (they're too small to work with anyway).

It'd be better to spend any free time we have writing elected office-holders or the media. Which reminds me, if you have some free time, send an e-mail to MSNBC complaining about Joe Scarborough's most recent abomination. Details, MSNBC link in this post:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1548102

[Arkana]

6. In the words of one of their heroes,

"Bring 'em on!"

Allow them into a special forum so that we can tear them down. No moderators, no holds barred. Just us, armed with the truth, and them.

[Bouncy Ball]

7. No, absolutely not.

There are other places on the internet to debate them. This is a "refuge" of sorts for me. I do NOT want them here in any way, shape, or form. It's called the Democratic Underground for a reason.

[lady lib]

29. My thoughts exactly, BB

I personally don't want contact with wingnuts (as it is, I'm outnumbered where I live). But I'm impressed with DUers who have the time and patience to present them with facts and reasoned arguments to help them 'see the light.'

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

8. There should be a section where all disruptive posts are archived

It could be a hall of shame of stupidity. I for one enjoy reading the ramblings of obviously idiotic and insane morons.

[ihaveaquestion]

9. Tampabay.com

The Politics forum on Tampabay.com is already such a board. There are members from all over the world - not just the Tampa Bay area. Check it out...

http://forums.sptimes.com/Forums/ubb/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=forum&f=15

[DoYouEverWonder]

27. That's the St. Petersburg Times forum

I hung out there a little before I came here.

Even worse is the Gainesville Sun forum. At first we had a pretty good balance but eventually the freepers took over and a lot of the liberals stopped posting.

[Bridget Burke]

10. No. We get enough over here already--for brief visits.

And there are plenty of other boards where they run rampant.

[noamnety]

11. I tried that on another board

During the elections a forum started up, and I honestly think everyone had good intentions going into it. But it was like banging my head against a wall. Every negative comment about how things are going in Iraq was met with an accusation that if you didn't believe things were going well, you weren't supporting the troops, you were aiding the enemy, etc. Anything bad that happened these last 4 years was Clinton's fault. Every ethics problem the current administration has is justified because Clinton had an affair.

These were people that in large part I had known for years from a nonpolitical forum. I went into it having political disagreements with republicans. I came out of it disliking them as people.

[GOPFighter]

12. To be honest, I have seen a few fairly sane posts on FR

A few weeks ago someone wrote (paraphrasing) "Sometimes I wonder how I and and someone from DU can read the same article and have a completely opposite reaction to it. Sometimes I wonder which of us is delusional. Is it me, or them" That's someone I'd like to talk to because I feel the same way sometimes.

[Stand and Fight]

15. Ever occur to you....

Did it ever occur to you that perhaps that person was a DUer on the FReeper site? I don't know if that was the case or not, but it may well be... Just a thought.
:shrug:

[Taxloss]

17. That way madness lies.

eom

[kuozzman]

19. It was me.

Just kidding, but it sounded like something I'd do on FR.

[kuozzman]

18. That's my point too.

I truly think I'm right about most of my opinions. And if I'm not, I want to know it. Seeing and discussing additional facts and information about anything is something I am always eager to do. Screw the talking points and the spin, let's talk about what we know. Nobody should have a problem with that. Unfortunately, many do.

Good post. :toast:

[Stand and Fight]

13. Nope.

I could not imagine a more pointless exercise or waste of bandwidth. Debate is supposed to be constructive and informative, and I cannot imagine that they would have anything beneficial or contributory to say.

[Shrek]

14. Sure, why not?

As long as it's contained to a single forum or thread, so that those who want to avoid it can do so easily. Given that safeguard, I don't see the harm.

[Taxloss]

16. If I wanted to talk to Freepers, I'd post at Free Republic.

So "no".

[kuozzman]

20. But if you say anything bad about Bush, you get banned.

I think that's the policy for the media at the White House as well.
:shrug:

[Taxloss]

22. I've heard they occasionally criticise Bush.

Probably only his choice of tie, but ...

Anyway, I want to talk to you guys, not a bunch of redneck amoral drunks.

[JitterbugPerfume]

21. this crap has been brought up before

and Skinner will allow it when pigs fly

it is a really bad idea

[Taxloss]

25. I wouldn't call it "crap". Naive and bad, certainly.

But the reason I prefer DU over all boards is its tight moderation and decorum. That would disappear like the morning mist with a freeper invasion. It feels like things are only just calming down after the election and the freeptard influx then.

[0007]

23. We'd have to have debating rules and we all know how the freeps

love to break rules.

It could prove productive and then again it may be a waste of time.

[jonnyblitz]

24. seems like we have enough debate between leftists and DLCers

no interest in debating republicans based on real life attempts.

[Maine-ah]

26. I think it could be good.

set up some rules, if it's not constructive, then the poster gets booted or the experiment could end. You never know what could happen, keep an open mind, we could win some to our side.

[DoYouEverWonder]

28. Why don't we set up a DU Group and call it 'Freeper Hell'?

Anyone who gets banned from the other forums gets sent to Freeper Hell first. Then if someone gets really out of hand then they get banished forever.

There are sick DUers like myself that like screw with freepers heads. The problem with doing this on other 'public' forums is there is little in the way of fair rules or moderators and people get out of control.

The big plus here would be that DUers would be in control of Freeper Hell. We would make the rules, we'd say what's fair.


Maybe we could just try it for a week or so?

Please, please, please.

Thanks.

[blondeatlast]

30. Plenty of open political forums, no need to ruin DU.

There's a reason I come to DU first.

[Moderator]

31. I'm locking this thread

reason:

Feel free to ask Administration in the
Ask The Administration forum