Skip to main content

View Diary: Mr. KOS, Code of Conduct Rule No. 1: Ad Hominem Attacks Are Verboten (151 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  i'm bored today, so i'll play your game (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    laserhaas, VetGrl, pico

    for awhile.

    1. Your narrative was not clear. A clarifying question is reasonable. I would have asked the same, and I'm NOT a lawyer. People who came to that diary may not have known what was going on. You certainly didn't help out in your own comment thread.

    But write whatever you want here or elsewhere.

    (Asking someone a question is not a defense of the culprits but whatever.)

    2. yes, I'd love to know the answer to those reasonable questions. Sorry you think it's BS but the previous diary was so confusing I really had no idea what was going on, and yes, since it was your diary, you do have a small obligation to help out where things are not clear. Instead you threw a tantrum and then wrote this meta-diary in an attempt to get sympathy for a comment-thread situation that was of your own making, because you think Adam has a personal vendetta for you and sits in his office looking for ways to ruin your life. Oh honey, no.

    3.  there's no gang ganging up on you and making you a victim here. What's with a few progressives lately? You ask some people here a simple question and they melt entirely the fuck down. Anyway, other than bored, I feel pretty great today.

    4.  I hope Markos ignores this code of conduct rule no 1, considering we already have the "Don't Be a Dick" rule. We're adults here, and we really don't need anymore handholding from the management.

    Dawkins is to atheism as Rand is to personal responsibility- mperiousRex.

    by terrypinder on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 07:58:20 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Don't be a dick rule is not applied - equally. (0+ / 0-)

      The issue is "ad hominem" attacks upon any D, calling it CT, nuts, or such - without backing up the allegations

      should be against the rules


      Mitt Romney was CEO of Bain until Aug 2001. Proof of Bain & Romney Fraud

      by laserhaas on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 08:22:31 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  well, i don't think it should be. let's move on. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        laserhaas

        Dawkins is to atheism as Rand is to personal responsibility- mperiousRex.

        by terrypinder on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 08:30:39 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  You can move to where you wish (0+ / 0-)

          I'm not going anywhere..


          Mitt Romney was CEO of Bain until Aug 2001. Proof of Bain & Romney Fraud

          by laserhaas on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 08:56:05 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  That's fine. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            VetGrl, Adam B

            but "ad hominems" won't ever be banned in the sense that you want them all because you couldn't answer a simple series of questions.

            I actually did make an attempt. While we were going back and forth, I quickly read through about a year's worth of your work here at Daily Kos. I still really have no idea what is going on with etoys and its bankruptcy having read your diaries and honestly Mitt Romney is a non-issue for me now. but there's a pattern in the comments threads of many of them: people show up confused, ask questions, you attack them, and then accuse them of being a gang of stalkers. Worse is when freak out when others try to fill the gaping holes in your own narrative because you're unwilling to do it. If this is how you behaved in court, well, no wonder you lost.

            Dawkins is to atheism as Rand is to personal responsibility- mperiousRex.

            by terrypinder on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 09:19:43 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site