Your Attention Please [Breaking News and WoD Flamewars]

[Admin Moderator]

Since my last vanity announcement on keywords went so swimmingly (it ended up with something like 5000 keywords added to it) I thought a great idea would be to throw some propane on some other fires with a vanity.

Breaking news is being abused again, big time. This goes in cycles, with sometimes people being responsible, but other times people not being very responsible.

We are in one of the not-very time periods.

Please, do not post something in Breaking News because you think it is something you want people to see. Place something in Breaking News only if it is

1. Something the networks would interrupt their programming to say,
2. The networks would interrupt their programming to say if they weren't overwhelmingly liberal,
3. Something that honestly would (not should, would) be of interest to majority of self-described conservatives
4. Official chapter announcements

Or things along those lines. Don't consider that a list of rules, but of guidelines. But act as if the guidelines matter, please. And flame the heck out of people that don't. And provide appropriate feedback to people who don't.

Some things that are never breaking news: Stories that have been posted before, stories that are over a day old, opinion vanities, freep this poll, or anything from the op-ed section of any newspaper.

Now, on to the WoD [War on Drugs] flamewars. There are a few problems with them. The flaming on them is tremendous. It is wrong for several reasons, and it should stop and the first thing we are going to do to try to get them to stop is to make a request for them to stop. If you feel the need to flame someone for something they say on one of these threads, do this (and yes, it involves a lot more work than just hitting reply, but such is life):

1. Post a copy of the article to the Smokey Backroom
2. Ping your flamee to that copy.
3. Go to town over there and keep the crap off the main forum.

Instead of hitting abuse on someone on a WoD thread right away (unless it is extremely bad), please just advise them to do what I am saying here- take it to the backroom. Link them to this if need be. And if you don't want to get into a flamewar, leave it at that. If you do, then join them in the backroom and have at it. The WoD flamewars overwhelm the latest posts page with a neverending sequence of posts that are just mindless insults. Please, spare us, and don't try to put it on the moderators to determine who fired the first shot. There are rarely clean hands here, and no matter what we do one side or another is going to complain.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled Freeping. I expect no fewer than 500 taunts at us in the keywords here before this is over. Thank you, and God Bless. ;-)

[BureaucratusMaximus]

Some of us have the brains and guts to know that the government isn't always right and doesn't always deserve unqualified support. The government and the Constitution are not the same thing.

That pretty much sums it up...doesn't it. Some people would just rather "live" in an environment where they don't have to make their own choices re: their life. I think they kinda do that sort of thing in China and Cuba; or so I hear. Might be a good vacation/life change option for some here.

[CWOJackson]

Perhaps you should read the Rolling Stone article (Jan 2003). Like I said, I doubt many people would call that magazine a jack booted thug fan magazine. And if you have to ask if removing three more meth manufacturers from civilized society isn't an improvement you do have serious reality problems.

[Willie Green]

However, I do insist on Latvia.

If you really MUST have Latvia, it's OK with me.
But the selection of foreign nations that we currently have available only consists of Canada, Germany, Israel, Japan, Mexico, Russia and United Kingdom.

Conspicuous in their absence are places like China, France, Iraq, India, Korea, Cuba, etc. etc.
Or one could have more general geopolitical regions: Balkans, European Union, Africa, South America, etc.

I'm not trying to be fussy or picky.
Just making a (hopefully) constructive suggestion.

[CWOJackson]

Oh yes, the great libertarian excuse.

"Oh yeah, Noelle Bush."

Wow, you got me there Skippy. LOL!

[MrLeRoy]

Do you have any reason to believe that there's any less meth on the streets because corrections has three more guests?

if you have to ask if removing three more meth manufacturers from civilized society isn't an improvement

That's not what I asked. Are you saying that the goal of the War On Some Drugs is not to reduce drug use but to remove undesirables from society?

[strela]

Do you know the bit he does "If they mated..."?

Talk about your conflicted souls ...

"The Force is bong with this one ...

[Hemingway's Ghost]

Wow, you got me there Skippy.

Don't make dippy assertions, then.

[MrLeRoy]

"Darth? ... Darth's not here."

[CWOJackson]

What you asked doesn't really matter much to me or in the grand scheme of things. It is obvious that you can't understand even a simply concept that Rolling Stone was able to grasp quite easily.

Let's put it into a ratio that you might understand then...as of this morning there are three less potential libertarian voters on the street.

[strela]

"Luke, you do not yet realize ... HOW TOTALLY BUZZZZZZED I AM!

[CWOJackson]

I would never repeat a mistake your parents made.

[MrLeRoy]

What you asked doesn't really matter much to me

Squirm, dodge, evade ... yup, you're a Drug Warrior.

[CWOJackson]

No, actually I'm just someone enjoying some great coffee. The only folks I know that are squirming right now are three dope dealers...or freedom fighters for some.

[Hemingway's Ghost]

I would never repeat a mistake your parents made.

Lest anyone wonder which side is interested in debate, and which side is interested in throwing off the gloves at center ice . . . there it is for all to see.

[and the horse you rode in on]

You could also argue your point in a civil manner using logic and persuasion instead of name calling and bitter responses.

Nah, that never works

[jayef]

So you're winning the drug war because you've taken 3 meth makers into custody? Great, terrific. How much are these three going to set you back? How easily do you think their production will be replaced? If there production is not replaced . . . better yet, if you popped half the meth labs in the country all at once . . . what happens to the demand for meth? What happens to the price for meth?

Yep, victory is at hand.

[CWOJackson]

Well Skippy, the only problem you have with your little large text morality play is that anyone reading it can go back through this entire thread and look at your humble posts...then laugh their butts off at you.

[MrLeRoy]

So you're winning the drug war because you've taken 3 meth makers into custody? Great, terrific. How much are these three going to set you back? How easily do you think their production will be replaced? If there production is not replaced . . . better yet, if you popped half the meth labs in the country all at once . . . what happens to the demand for meth? What happens to the price for meth?

What we ask doesn't matter to the Chief Wriggling Officer.

[Skooz]

Maybe you should rename this thread "Yet Another WOD Slug Fest."

[and the horse you rode in on]

BTW, what is a WoD?

War on Dumbasses