Miss Manners defends Darkstar

Northern Huntsman · Post by **Northern Huntsman** » 2003-01-06 04:01pm

Maybe you all should give this a rest?

Personal attacks on someone really aren't the best way to bring your opinion across... right Mr. Wong?

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2003-01-06 04:06pm

OKay...I can't speak for the rest...but have you actually read some of this stuff?

Or had the 'pleasure' of debating DS/GK?

Or seen the slander he doe to people because they don't loyally worship him?

Seriously don't make comments on subject you truly have no idea about on a person who is a sterling example of why Wong has a Hatemail page

Cpt_Frank · Post by **Cpt_Frank** » 2003-01-06 04:09pm

Northern Huntsman wrote:Maybe you all should give this a rest?

Personal attacks on someone really aren't the best way to bring your opinion across... right Mr. Wong?

Well that's a GREAT first post.

If you show someone the evidence and he ignores it, you draw logical conclusions and that guy simply ignores it, keeps on repeating his bullshit and throws insults then he shouldn't be surprised to get flamed.
Don't expect us to be nice and prissy while you vomit forth stupidity (as SirNitram is fond of saying).

Northern Huntsman · Post by **Northern Huntsman** » 2003-01-06 04:27pm

Cpt_Frank wrote: Well that's a GREAT first post.

If you show someone the evidence and he ignores it, you draw logical conclusions and that guy simply ignores it, keeps on repeating his bullshit and throws insults then he shouldn't be surprised to get flamed.
Don't expect us to be nice and prissy while you vomit forth stupidity (as SirNitram is fond of saying).

He's banned, and gone now, but there are still individuals jumping on the bandwagon. If you don't want to bother yourself with his points, then don't read his site, because thats where the majority of his work is based at the moment.

OKay...I can't speak for the rest...but have you actually read some of this stuff?

Or had the 'pleasure' of debating DS/GK?

Or seen the slander he doe to people because they don't loyally worship him?

Seriously don't make comments on subject you truly have no idea about on a person who is a sterling example of why Wong has a Hatemail page

Funny about the hatemail page actually, I have several friends who are on the hatemail page, and don't even know what they did to get there, LOL.

I have indeed read some of his materials, and I have even provided him with some of his background info. I actually have had the pleasure of watching ASVS and later Spacebattles.com, and the continued "childish" behavior of several individuals regarding the site.

Furthermore, the most recent behavior regarding Darkstar's site is rather childish. I mean, c'mon guys, its hard to take someone's point serious when they're attempting to trash another person in an even more juvenile manner.

Did Mr. Wong email him about it? I sincerely doubt it.

Ted C · Post by **Ted C** » 2003-01-06 05:15pm

Northern Huntsman wrote:Maybe you all should give this a rest?

Personal attacks on someone really aren't the best way to bring your opinion across... right Mr. Wong?

Don't start. Mike already tried being rational with DarkStar.

Lord Poe · Post by **Lord Poe** » 2003-01-06 05:29pm

Northern Huntsman wrote:Maybe you all should give this a rest?

Personal attacks on someone really aren't the best way to bring your opinion across... right Mr. Wong?

Wrong, you prissy little twat. Now see, that's a personal attack on you, AND it brings my point across.

Concession Accepted.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-01-06 06:53pm

Northern Huntsman wrote:Maybe you all should give this a rest?

Maybe you should shove your sanctimonious attitude up your ass, so it can be closer to your fucking head.

Personal attacks on someone really aren't the best way to bring your opinion across... right Mr. Wong?

Which is why most of my website contains detailed technical arguments which are obviously beyond your intellectual limits, hence you focus on my retaliation for Darkstar's bandwidth theft.

Northern Huntsman · Post by **Northern Huntsman** » 2003-01-06 09:11pm

Darth Wong wrote:
Northern Huntsman wrote:Maybe you all should give this a rest?
Maybe you should shove your sanctimonious attitude up your ass, so it can be closer to your fucking head.
Personal attacks on someone really aren't the best way to bring your opinion across... right Mr. Wong?
Which is why most of my website contains detailed technical arguments which are obviously beyond your intellectual limits, hence you focus on my retaliation for Darkstar's bandwidth theft.

Resorting to personal insults again? Well I'm perfectly open to a debate if that's how you'd like to settle things, but try to keep insults upon my intelligence to a bare minimum, it hurts my feelings.

The interesting thing about your website is that in order for the Trek side to get any of their points actually mentioned, they are forced to endure the constant spew of insults. Interestingly, these quotes here are far and above the same stuff that "Darkstar's" were made of.

Of course, it is my opinion that the whole topic is undebateable at this point. There are any number of points and counter-points using visuals as pure scientific evidence, and so the circle goes on and on with no real proof to support either side's stances. So, the result is that groups congregate, remark at how stupid the other side is, and essentiall wank themselves to death about their uberpowerful respective side.

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2003-01-06 09:26pm

Oh fuck off...jesus H Christ why is we get another whining piss-ant bitch who's decided to place it upon himself to judge us because we are prodding a moron of the first calibur and then generalizes us as assholes because we aren't cordial.

Did you even fucking try to check the site out or are you going to instantly judge us because we aren't being cordial to you?

If you want to debate, then do so...but realize we will scrutinize because more often than not we have heard it before(who only knows what that must feel like for either Wong or MoO or any of the other notables)

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2003-01-06 09:28pm

Northern Huntsman wrote: Resorting to personal insults again? Well I'm perfectly open to a debate if that's how you'd like to settle things, but try to keep insults upon my intelligence to a bare minimum, it hurts my feelings.

You imply that the only way Wong was able to effectively respond to your statement was by flaming you. That is obviously incorrect.

The interesting thing about your website is that in order for the Trek side to get any of their points actually mentioned, they are forced to endure the constant spew of insults. Interestingly, these quotes here are far and above the same stuff that "Darkstar's" were made of.

What the hell are you talking about? It is hardly impressive for someone to have a quote "far and above" what DarkStar used to say here. In fact, anyone with an intact brain-stem should be able to duplicate such a feat. Incidentally, I have recently found something shocking--Trekkies are not "forced" to endure insults merely because they wish to make points. In fact, they endure insults because the majority of the points they wish to make are illogical. I will elaborate on this later, but suffice it to say that this common "excuse" for Trekkies on this board is not accurate.

Of course, it is my opinion that the whole topic is undebateable at this point. There are any number of points and counter-points using visuals as pure scientific evidence, and so the circle goes on and on with no real proof to support either side's stances. So, the result is that groups congregate, remark at how stupid the other side is, and essentiall wank themselves to death about their uberpowerful respective side.

Again, what are you talking about? Are you suggesting that we should stop trying to explain things to people like Mr. Anderson simply because they have just gone off to their own group to make bullshit statements? In fact, you are disproving your own point. It clearly demonstrates that the members of this board are NOT biased in such a manner as you imply, because they ARE willing to continue debates in the first place against such people, outside of the forum. Contrary to what you are claiming, this demonstrates conclusively that the board does NOT rely on "home-field advantage" to win debates. That members of this board are willing to go outside of the board shows that no such "advantage" is required by them, and their record outside of the board speaks for itself.

Northern Huntsman · Post by **Northern Huntsman** » 2003-01-06 09:42pm

Master of Ossus wrote:You imply that the only way Wong was able to effectively respond to your statement was by flaming you. That is obviously incorrect.

No, I merely implied that I expected a flaming statement as part of his reply, which I received. Coincidence, I should think not.

What the hell are you talking about? It is hardly impressive for someone to have a quote "far and above" what DarkStar used to say here. In fact, anyone with an intact brain-stem should be able to duplicate such a feat. Incidentally, I have recently found something shocking--Trekkies are not "forced" to endure insults merely because they wish to make points. In fact, they endure insults because the majority of the points they wish to make are illogical. I will elaborate on this later, but suffice it to say that this common "excuse" for Trekkies on this board is not accurate.

But if everyone is so much better than Darkstar why are they sinking to his level? Yes, thats right, generalize the Trek side as a whole, and then label them illogical.

Again, what are you talking about? Are you suggesting that we should stop trying to explain things to people like Mr. Anderson simply because they have just gone off to their own group to make bullshit statements? In fact, you are disproving your own point. It clearly demonstrates that the members of this board are NOT biased in such a manner as you imply, because they ARE willing to continue debates in the first place against such people, outside of the forum. Contrary to what you are claiming, this demonstrates conclusively that the board does NOT rely on "home-field advantage" to win debates. That members of this board are willing to go outside of the board shows that no such "advantage" is required by them, and their record outside of the board speaks for itself.

No, I'm suggesting that when somebody doesn't "budge" on their example, it might not be because they're morons. Over at SB.com we've seen points and counterpoints and whole arguments take months to play out. I get the impression that when someone finds a flaw in a calculation, they immediately all slap eachother on the back and say "I knew it! Look at the moron!". Actually, the sheer number of Trekies here is rather indicative of such an attitude. Furthermore, the claims here are more or less contained here. (I'm including Poe's and Saxton's sites)

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2003-01-06 10:08pm

Northern Huntsman wrote:
What the hell are you talking about? It is hardly impressive for someone to have a quote "far and above" what DarkStar used to say here. In fact, anyone with an intact brain-stem should be able to duplicate such a feat. Incidentally, I have recently found something shocking--Trekkies are not "forced" to endure insults merely because they wish to make points. In fact, they endure insults because the majority of the points they wish to make are illogical. I will elaborate on this later, but suffice it to say that this common "excuse" for Trekkies on this board is not accurate.
But if everyone is so much better than Darkstar why are they sinking to his level? Yes, thats right, generalize the Trek side as a whole, and then label them illogical.

I'm not generalizing. I have documented this phenomena. I will reveal the process to you next week, once I have one more bit of evidence in. Incidentally, this is NOT sinking to DarkStar's level. I assume that you were not here during the DarkStar debates, but in order for this to be DarkStar-like, it would need to continue like this while ignoring rebuttals for at least three rounds of debate. If you look at his website, you will see a multitude of examples of the tactics that he repeatedly used, but you will NOT be able to see the DarkStar that we knew. The DarkStar that we knew was forced to defend his findings by repeatedly ignoring rebuttals while stating his original point. When people finally got tired and left, he would proceed to claim victory by default. None of the Trekkies here that I have seen have demonstrated anywhere NEAR that level of dishonesty. Some of them have been downright stupid at times, but I have never seen anyone so oblivious to the rest of the world as to think that they were winning debates in the manner DarkStar claimed he was doing so.

No, I'm suggesting that when somebody doesn't "budge" on their example, it might not be because they're morons. Over at SB.com we've seen points and counterpoints and whole arguments take months to play out. I get the impression that when someone finds a flaw in a calculation, they immediately all slap eachother on the back and say "I knew it! Look at the moron!". Actually, the sheer number of Trekies here is rather indicative of such an attitude. Furthermore, the claims here are more or less contained here. (I'm including Poe's and Saxton's sites)

That's not what DarkStar was doing. It is perfectly valid, if one person is completely right, to state clearly that the other person is wrong and not to "budge" and occupy middle-ground. The middle-ground is not always more reasonable. DarkStar's problem was his use of innumerable logical fallacies while repeating the same statement, usually while ignoring reasonable and logical rebuttals. Moreover, you screamed at me for generalizing the Trekkie contingent (when I clearly was not) and then you come back and with this blatant generalization? This is so obviously a double-standard that I think everyone will be able to clearly see who is being reasonable and who is not. Furthermore, the number of "Trekkies" we have here is not indicative of unreasonableness. Rather, it is indicative of the small numbers of rational Trekkies. The way we define "Trekkie" it means anyone who believes that the UFP would stand a much greater chance against the Galactic Empire than the rest of us hold to. That is different from the usual definition of "Trekkie." I think you would be well advised to look over the last few posts and understand what is going on, during this discussion, before you respond.

Northern Huntsman · Post by **Northern Huntsman** » 2003-01-06 10:37pm

Master of Ossus wrote:I'm not generalizing. I have documented this phenomena. I will reveal the process to you next week, once I have one more bit of evidence in. Incidentally, this is NOT sinking to DarkStar's level. I assume that you were not here during the DarkStar debates, but in order for this to be DarkStar-like, it would need to continue like this while ignoring rebuttals for at least three rounds of debate. If you look at his website, you will see a multitude of examples of the tactics that he repeatedly used, but you will NOT be able to see the DarkStar that we knew. The DarkStar that we knew was forced to defend his findings by repeatedly ignoring rebuttals while stating his original point. When people finally got tired and left, he would proceed to claim victory by default. None of the Trekkies here that I have seen have demonstrated anywhere NEAR that level of dishonesty. Some of them have been downright stupid at times, but I have never seen anyone so oblivious to the rest of the world as to think that they were winning debates in the manner DarkStar claimed he was doing so.

I'm not debating Darkstar's behavior, I'm debating the fact that people are kicking a dead horse. He's gone, of no more consequence here, and yet he is mentioned in nearly 50% of posts. There are even "Hate Threads" as I would call this one, which seek to make even more fun of him.

That's not what DarkStar was doing. It is perfectly valid, if one person is completely right, to state clearly that the other person is wrong and not to "budge" and occupy middle-ground. The middle-ground is not always more reasonable.

This is the crux of the problem. When one person is utterly convinced that they are in the right, and the other feels they have conclusively proven otherwise, how does the argument proceed?

DarkStar's problem was his use of innumerable logical fallacies while repeating the same statement, usually while ignoring reasonable and logical rebuttals.

That still does not mean people should still concern themselves with him.

Moreover, you screamed at me for generalizing the Trekkie contingent (when I clearly was not) and then you come back and with this blatant generalization? This is so obviously a double-standard that I think everyone will be able to clearly see who is being reasonable and who is not. Furthermore, the number of "Trekkies" we have here is not indicative of unreasonableness. Rather, it is indicative of the small numbers of rational Trekkies.

No, the number of "Trekkies" here is indicative of the attitude. This place scares the bejesus out of many newbie Trek fans, and frankly, thats a very sad thing. Instead of arguing in a logical and scholarly manner (and setting them straight no doubt), they are scared-off and forced to form their own opinions, usually compounded with hate for the SW side. This in itself helps to breed the "moronic Trekkie" that this place so loathes. If people would merely drop the "newbie Trekkie attitude" and actually educate individuals, there wouldn't be as much of a problem.

The way we define "Trekkie" it means anyone who believes that the UFP would stand a much greater chance against the Galactic Empire than the rest of us hold to. That is different from the usual definition of "Trekkie." I think you would be well advised to look over the last few posts and understand what is going on, during this discussion, before you respond.

That in itself is open to interpretation. I myself feel that in an all-out engagement the Federation would be hard-pressed to defeat the Galactic Empire. All-out galactic war is not the only method of combat however. This is something that Mr. Wong himself did not seek to debate. (A GCS vs. an ISD 1v1) because the situation was artificial (as I recall, correct me as I'm wrong.) Just how isn't a wormhole and intergalactic war not artificial?

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2003-01-06 10:40pm

1. Wong opened this more or less because Darkstar has had just such a prescense here.

2. ISD vs GCS would never happen unless somehow brought upon outside influence...thus what's your point...saying ST vs SW will never happen because it's completely artificial how the two would meet or that because you're saying that maybe just maybe the one on one would be better yardstick go by even though the ICS more or less shoots the whole ISD vs GCS out of the water(let alone what most of AoTC does)

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-01-06 10:43pm

No, the number of "Trekkies" here is indicative of the attitude. This place scares the bejesus out of many newbie Trek fans, and frankly, thats a very sad thing. Instead of arguing in a logical and scholarly manner (and setting them straight no doubt), they are scared-off and forced to form their own opinions, usually compounded with hate for the SW side. This in itself helps to breed the "moronic Trekkie" that this place so loathes. If people would merely drop the "newbie Trekkie attitude" and actually educate individuals, there wouldn't be as much of a problem.

I'm sorry, but fucking moronic trekkies were around before the SD.net forum ever existed. The only newbies who get flamed here are the fucking morons who don't even bother reading the site to check if their idiotic arguments have already been smacked down.

That in itself is open to interpretation. I myself feel that in an all-out engagement the Federation would be hard-pressed to defeat the Galactic Empire. All-out galactic war is not the only method of combat however. This is something that Mr. Wong himself did not seek to debate. (A GCS vs. an ISD 1v1) because the situation was artificial (as I recall, correct me as I'm wrong.) Just how isn't a wormhole and intergalactic war not artificial?

Open to interpretation? Right ....

Hard-pressed? Try slaughter. What IS the purpose behind debating a GCS and ISD? What, you think the GCS has a chance? What is the point of this useless nitpick?

Northern Huntsman · Post by **Northern Huntsman** » 2003-01-06 10:53pm

Ghost Rider wrote:1. Wong opened this more or less because Darkstar has had just such a prescense here.

2. ISD vs GCS would never happen unless somehow brought upon outside influence...thus what's your point...saying ST vs SW will never happen because it's completely artificial how the two would meet or that because you're saying that maybe just maybe the one on one would be better yardstick go by even though the ICS more or less shoots the whole ISD vs GCS out of the water(let alone what most of AoTC does)

1. This certainly gives me the idea that Wong wants to "give-in to his hatred" so to speak, and let Darkstar continue to gnaw at him.

2. Then by-all means, start a thread.

What I'm saying is...

Its a null-point claiming that ISD vs. GCS would never happen without being due to outside influence because ST vs. SW would never happen without being due to outside influence. Why does the ST vs SW have to mean Intergalactic War?

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2003-01-06 10:57pm

1. So what is he somehow supposed to not dislike a person who has decided to take it upon himself to call the man a liar and a pussy, with no thoughts of retaliation?

2. So what the hell do you want? A peaceful exchnage of technology even though it's shown expansion is what the Empire wants, and would look at the ST galaxy as a sea of resources and one that is even better a poorly defended one to boot?

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-01-06 11:00pm

Northern Huntsman wrote:
Its a null-point claiming that ISD vs. GCS would never happen without being due to outside influence because ST vs. SW would never happen without being due to outside influence. Why does the ST vs SW have to mean Intergalactic War?

Star Wars versus Star Trek has always been about United Federation of Planets versus Galactic Empire, actually.

It's still a nitpick, unless you want to claim that a GCS has a chance against an ISD?

Northern Huntsman · Post by **Northern Huntsman** » 2003-01-06 11:04pm

Ghost Rider wrote:1. So what is he somehow supposed to not dislike a person who has decided to take it upon himself to call the man a liar and a pussy, with no thoughts of retaliation?

Really? I called Mr. Wong a liar and a pussy? Care to show me?

2. So what the hell do you want? A peaceful exchnage of technology even though it's shown expansion is what the Empire wants, and would look at the ST galaxy as a sea of resources and one that is even better a poorly defended one to boot?

No, you don't seem to understand here. ST vs. SW does not mean Galactic Empire vs. Federation. A simple ship to ship engagement could be it, and nothing else. Perhaps by the graces of Q an ISD is transported into first contact with the Enterprise, and the two duke it out one on one? How is that any less "artifical" than a magical wormhole that suddenly appears between the two galaxies?

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-01-06 11:06pm

Northern Huntsman wrote:
Ghost Rider wrote:1. So what is he somehow supposed to not dislike a person who has decided to take it upon himself to call the man a liar and a pussy, with no thoughts of retaliation

Really? I called Mr. Wong a liar and a pussy? Care to show me?
Darkstar did that, not you. That's why Darkstar was banned, actually.

No, you don't seem to understand here. ST vs. SW does not mean Galactic Empire vs. Federation. A simple ship to ship engagement could be it, and nothing else. Perhaps by the graces of Q an ISD is transported into first contact with the Enterprise, and the two duke it out one on one? How is that any less "artifical" than a magical wormhole that suddenly appears between the two galaxies?

It doesn't MATTER. What difference does it make? In any combat situation where exactly does Star Trek win? Nowhere.

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2003-01-06 11:06pm

No dumbfuck..Darkstar has...which is the reason why he has no love for him...care to twists my words some more shit head?

As for the ST vs SW, whom do you think represents each galaxy...and how would an ISD vs GCS fight be anymore than the laughter of the tech officer as he glances at the power generation of a GCS before firing one MTL?

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2003-01-06 11:54pm

Northern Huntsman wrote: Huntsman, you seem to believe that Anderson is completely done with. Instead, he remains a thorn in our side. We are inanely assaulted by massive volumes of people who have stumbled upon his website and agree with it. These people tend to be our most idiotic trolls. Look at Sovereign's behavior. On other boards, which many of our users frequent, Anderson is highly respected by the Trek contingents, which laud his arguments despite their baseless nature.

Moreover, you screamed at me for generalizing the Trekkie contingent (when I clearly was not) and then you come back and with this blatant generalization? This is so obviously a double-standard that I think everyone will be able to clearly see who is being reasonable and who is not. Furthermore, the number of "Trekkies" we have here is not indicative of unreasonableness. Rather, it is indicative of the small numbers of rational Trekkies.
No, the number of "Trekkies" here is indicative of the attitude. This place scares the bejesus out of many newbie Trek fans, and frankly, thats a very sad thing. Instead of arguing in a logical and scholarly manner (and setting them straight no doubt), they are scared-off and forced to form their own opinions, usually compounded with hate for the SW side. This in itself helps to breed the "moronic Trekkie" that this place so loathes. If people would merely drop the "newbie Trekkie attitude" and actually educate individuals, there wouldn't be as much of a problem.
Frankly, if they are terrified of rational debate then they should fear this place. If they understand standard debating tactics, and are logical and scientific in their methods, then they have nothing to fear. Their feelings are irrelevent. If they are unwilling to display their views publicly then we have no use for them here.

The way we define "Trekkie" it means anyone who believes that the UFP would stand a much greater chance against the Galactic Empire than the rest of us hold to. That is different from the usual definition of "Trekkie." I think you would be well advised to look over the last few posts and understand what is going on, during this discussion, before you respond.
That in itself is open to interpretation. I myself feel that in an all-out engagement the Federation would be hard-pressed to defeat the Galactic Empire. All-out galactic war is not the only method of combat however. This is something that Mr. Wong himself did not seek to debate. (A GCS vs. an ISD 1v1) because the situation was artificial (as I recall, correct me as I'm wrong.) Just how isn't a wormhole and intergalactic war not artificial?

It is artificial in the sense that it would likely not happen in the course of the two series, however such is not the purpose of the debate. The situations between 1 GCS and 1 ISD are ludicrous because they rely on situations that would NEVER come about reasonably during a war. The wormhole is merely a means to have the two sides meet each other. Isolating individual ships for both sides is stupid because it eliminates some of the massive advantages that the Empire has. The purpose is to have the two universes at war, and in such a scenario there is frankly no way that an Imperial ship would become so isolated in such a situation. The Empire would attack with massive numerical superiority almost at will, by virtue of both its larger numbers and HUGE advantage in FTL speed.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-01-07 12:15am

Northern Huntsman wrote:Resorting to personal insults again?

Since you have not actually made any points whatsoever other than to attack my integrity, you throw stones from a glass house. The only difference is that I don't pretend to be polite, asshole.

Well I'm perfectly open to a debate if that's how you'd like to settle things, but try to keep insults upon my intelligence to a bare minimum, it hurts my feelings.

Give me evidence that you have intelligence, and I'll stop pointing out its absence.

The interesting thing about your website is that in order for the Trek side to get any of their points actually mentioned, they are forced to endure the constant spew of insults. Interestingly, these quotes here are far and above the same stuff that "Darkstar's" were made of.

And what points would those be, since you've presented precisely none so far?

Of course, it is my opinion that the whole topic is undebateable at this point. There are any number of points and counter-points using visuals as pure scientific evidence, and so the circle goes on and on with no real proof to support either side's stances.

There's proof; your refusal to recognize it is your problem.

So, the result is that groups congregate, remark at how stupid the other side is, and essentiall wank themselves to death about their uberpowerful respective side.

That's what you would like to think, isn't it?

EmperorMing · Post by **EmperorMing** » 2003-01-07 03:46am

Darkstar is blasted apart on a regular basis because he posts so much BS and he makes no sense. (and he seems to lie...alot)

We cannot let his website go unanswered after all of the bullshit and 'debates' he has participated in and posted here and elswhere; especially with what is on his website in a vain attempt to refute this site.

Kinda like a shouting match...

Slartibartfast · Post by **Slartibartfast** » 2003-01-07 10:33am

Northern Huntsman wrote:Maybe you all should give this a rest?

Personal attacks on someone really aren't the best way to bring your opinion across... right Mr. Wong?

Hm, why are all your post of the "play nice kids" kind? Are you some kind of civility and good manners freak?