Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: UCANSEE2

Understood - in this case it is the sarcasm in your post that was probably the part that I disagree with using.

We all knew it was a vanity post. Your telling us so was extraneous. Hence the reason for telling us was to attempt to ridicule the author’s use of vanity.

Are you saying the discretion was poor?

Not a big deal. Just sayin’


44 posted on 01/13/2011 7:16:25 AM PST by Principled (Get the capital back! NRST!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies ]


To: Principled
Hence the reason for telling us was to attempt to ridicule the author’s use of vanity.

Yes. Vanity threads are discouraged, as a general rule.

Are you saying the discretion was poor?

In this case, no. There have been many vanity threads in the past that ended up being productive. I still made comments on those threads mentioning that they were VANITIES and discouraged as a general principle. This one seems to have also been productive.

Sometimes, a person 'feels' that their 'opinion' deserves the limelight of having it's own THREAD.

Sometimes they are right.

But they still should put the word VANITY in the TITLE.

45 posted on 01/13/2011 8:08:30 AM PST by UCANSEE2 (Lame and ill-informed post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson