Do you oppose users just for the sake of it?

[Mega-Bear]

Funny, because you sound a lot like user 3 in his example here:

Except Obama actually had nothing to do with it. You're a total hypocrite for what you just posted.

[Ad Bot]

[Chrono]

Except Obama actually had nothing to do with it.

But was there a need to insult him for being misinformed?

You're a total hypocrite for what you just posted.

I don't see how.

[Mega-Bear]

But was there a need to insult him for being misinformed?

To me, yes. I see people try to pin bad things on Obama constantly and it is annoying.

I don't see how.

1. I call someone a handicap for blaming SOPA on Obama.
2. You randomly attack me for that post.
3. Topic is about why you shouldn't oppose users for no reason.
4. You're essentially attacking me for correcting someone, albeit in an aggressive manner.

Hypocrite wasn't the best choice of words I suppose, but it's the closest match I could think of.

[carolcat]

I've never been a fan of purposefully being mean to people, and I always apologize if I was mean.
Honestly I can't stand being mean to anyone.

[CityRPG]

I am innocent from having instigated any problems in the past and I will likely refrain from doing so for the long, healthy remainder of my life.

[carolcat]

I am innocent from having instigated any problems in the past and I will likely refrain from doing so for the long, healthy remainder of my life.

I'm sure we all wish you luck on that.

[Chrono]

1. I call someone a handicap for blaming SOPA on Obama.
2. You randomly attack me for that post.
3. Topic is about why you shouldn't oppose users for no reason.
4. You're essentially attacking me for correcting someone, albeit in an aggressive manner.

Hypocrite wasn't the best choice of words I suppose, but it's the closest match I could think of.

Oh so you can 'attack' someone with some sort of 'justified' reason but the moment I say anything about you it's immediately 'random' and for 'no reason'.

[Mega-Bear]

Oh so you can 'attack' someone with some sort of 'justified' reason but the moment I say anything about you it's immediately 'random' and for 'no reason'.

Way to twist what I said around. Blaming SOPA on Obama is one thing, calling the person that blames Obama for SOPA a handicap is another. You're attacking me for such a small thing it's pathetic. This can go on for days, just let it go.

[Orion]

there's a difference between answering someone and insulting someone.

you can say
'obama had nothing to do with it'
and it'd be fine, instead of
'obama had nothing to do with it, handicap.'

then you become the jerk

but honestly i'm not taking any sides.

[Mega-Bear]

there's a difference between answering someone and insulting someone.

you can say
'obama had nothing to do with it'
and it'd be fine, instead of
'obama had nothing to do with it, handicap.'

then you become the jerk

but honestly i'm not taking any sides.

To me, yes. I see people try to pin bad things on Obama constantly and it is annoying.

albeit in an aggressive manner.

I've already pointed out that, to an extent, my actions at the time were too strong. Regardless people need to educate themselves before they pull the old Obama card.

[Cancel]

I've already pointed out that, to an extent, my actions at the time were too strong. Regardless people need to educate themselves before they pull the old Obama card.

obama is stupid, you're a handicap

[Chrono]

Way to twist what I said around.

I didn't need to twist anything around. You said it directly. Stop being so self-righteous.

[Skip]

ITT: Mega-Bear and Chrono should've voted yes.
Or at least Mega-Bear. Depends on how you view the poll I guess.

[CityRPG]

Mega, you and Brian both have a major problem with prefixing what you say with something like "You're a handicap."

Seriously, if you just write "Sopa is a bad idea because of XYZ" instead of "You're a handicap, Sopa is a bad idea because of XYZ", you won't attract that much hostility.

[Mega-Bear]

Okay, I am sorry. I was too rash.