DO NOT BE FOOLED!!!

[H2O Man]

442. Gracious.

Over the weekend, I “joined” in on an OP/thread by friend “bigtree,” in which he spoke of being a member of your fan club. I thought it was a wonderful gesture on his part, and I was more than happy to add my two cents to it. I did so without any reservations. However, for the sake of this conversation, I will note that it was shortly after disagreeing with you on the nature of forum members’ opinions of Hillary Clinton.

By no coincidence, that same general disagreement is found here, on this OP/thread that you started. In response to bigtree’s comment per people either “getting it” or not, I noted that one could “get” your OP, but not appreciate it. Indeed, one can get it, not appreciate it, but still heartily endorse our friend’s fan club post ……for good writers, like good politicians, athletes, etc, are human beings ……and human beings are not, by definition, perfect.

I noted on bigtree’s OP that, at my age, I am no longer a “fan” of anyone (or any team). Thus, while I truly enjoy watching the Super Bowl, or NBA finals, I’m never “disappointed.” My favorite sport is boxing. On May 2, Floyd Mayweather will fight Manny Pacquiao; this will be the single biggest money-making event in sports history. Mayweather, for example, should easily double the $92 million he made in a single bout, in September of 2013. Needless to say, no matter who wins, about half the fans will be disappointed.

That type of “disappointment” is merely the result of one person setting a standard for another’s behavior. Not only is it patronizing, at best, but it can only lead to -- well, disappointment. Better to set standards for one’s self, and recognizing that, just like everyone else, we all have flaws.

I’m getting a bit side-tracked, a not uncommon feature of old age.

I’m glad -- though not surprised -- that you take a different approach to discussing Clinton et al with your friends in real life. I suspect that this is rather common among those who post on the internet, including DU. Speaking only for myself -- an example, I suppose, of one of the standards that I set for myself -- I try to be as respectful of people here, as I would were they sitting in my living room. That doesn’t absolutely exclude ever making a snaky reply to an individual who I recognize as a troll, or responding with an attempt at humor when someone says something foolish. But is does mean that I do not assume that the majority of people who disagree with me on an issue such as Ms. Clinton, are not trolls or fools.

I think that the tone being set on DU:GD is becoming too harsh and toxic to allow for meaningful discussions to compete with the nonsense. In my opinion, some of your recent comments have added to that ugly tone. I also recognize that you have the right to post whatever you want to. Yet, not withstanding the temporary pleasure that snark may bring, I wonder if, deep down, you really think that those posts serve any positive role in a discussion about Ms. Clinton’s qualifications to be President?