General Discussion

jeanmarc

(1,685 posts)

77. Me neither

Sun May 14, 2017, 08:35 AM

May 2017

I have nothing against posters, but we have a great deal of noise. I click and am always disappointed. It really is like the majority of the threads here are horrible. It's embarrassing.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

94 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

We should ban speculation from the forum? [View all] bigtree May 2017 OP

What we want is for people not to brettdale May 2017 #1

rejecting reports, out of hand bigtree May 2017 #3

Censorship is a tactic I abhor. I'd rather make up my own mind about what I hear, shraby May 2017 #6

When has anyone been censored? Hortensis May 2017 #55

Okay, let's take you at your word jberryhill May 2017 #9

IANAL. But, while the Constitution provides that members of Congress Stonepounder May 2017 #28

Yes, that applies to members of congress during session and in transit to/from jberryhill May 2017 #31

I was agreeing with you that Stonepounder May 2017 #33

In defense of nothing, here's an assist: OilemFirchen May 2017 #30

Is the only way to discuss is as you dictate? uppityperson May 2017 #40

Okay, then what aspect of the asserted facts would YOU like to discuss? jberryhill May 2017 #42

Message auto-removed Name removed May 2017 #21

If you can prove a lie, then prove it. n/t pnwmom May 2017 #26

You don't know if they are lying or not...I would rather have all the information and make Demsrule86 May 2017 #84

...or other reasons. "strident" - indeed. other words work, too! NRaleighLiberal May 2017 #2

Freedom of Speech sucks. L. Coyote May 2017 #4

Twitter is happening, leaks are happening ... Taylor has had a pretty good record so far, so it's bettyellen May 2017 #5

I agree with you. WheelWalker May 2017 #7

"Rejecting speculative sources, out of hand, seems to be a foolish" jberryhill May 2017 #8

that's it bigtree May 2017 #11

So, go ahead jberryhill May 2017 #12

did people engage you on your opinion? bigtree May 2017 #23

Not really, no jberryhill May 2017 #24

It's your delivery Charlotte Little May 2017 #89

I have no objection to INFORMED speculation... brooklynite May 2017 #10

there are many different types of information consumers on the net bigtree May 2017 #19

Then why not just skip those OP's and go on to ones that interest you? n/t pnwmom May 2017 #60

Speculation, by its very definition, does not rest on evidence but on guesswork. LanternWaste May 2017 #94

I support the availability of the information on DU Mr. Ected May 2017 #13

It's unfortunate that it devolves into discussions about people jberryhill May 2017 #14

Truth doesn't care who the source is Mr. Ected May 2017 #15

I don't dispute that the truth doesn't care who the source is... flotsam May 2017 #86

Who said there was one? jberryhill May 2017 #88

Truth will out. In the meantime, we can talk and think about it uppityperson May 2017 #41

Naw. Even if the "speculation" turns out to be a hoax, we learn from it. McCamy Taylor May 2017 #16

"What's the worst that can happen" jberryhill May 2017 #17

DU is not "60 Minutes." We are not even a "reliable source." This is a message board. McCamy Taylor May 2017 #20

Okay, so, let's have a dialogue jberryhill May 2017 #22

Actually you are trying very hard on multiple threads to OnDoutside May 2017 #54

How am I stifling anything by discussing it? jberryhill May 2017 #68

You don't know, no more than any of the rest of us, and neither of them claim to have 100% perfect OnDoutside May 2017 #93

Why truthaddict247 May 2017 #56

Why don't you address the blog post as well? jberryhill May 2017 #69

Why do you keep pushing that point when Claude Taylor acknowledged he'd made a mistake pnwmom May 2017 #61

Wow, surprised you'd ignore my point about the blog post jberryhill May 2017 #70

To read or not to read ? That is the question . nocalflea May 2017 #18

My take: I'm a big boy who can make credibility decisions for myself Goodheart May 2017 #25

Can you point out where someone called for "banning" anything? jberryhill May 2017 #27

fwiw bigtree May 2017 #32

Some people can't stand that Louise Mensch was right about some things they got wrong; pnwmom May 2017 #29

Thats assuming though that the reason Comey was fired was because of the Russian investigations. cstanleytech May 2017 #37

Of course that was the reason. Comey told the Senate he was working with 2 Federal prosecutors pnwmom May 2017 #39

Sure its a safe bet but its also possible they did it to provide a distraction from cstanleytech May 2017 #43

What do they want to distract from? Maybe they want to stop an investigation into DT's network pnwmom May 2017 #45

This is the worst run forum on this site jeanmarc May 2017 #34

Agreed!!! LovingA2andMI May 2017 #36

I don't mean to kill this forum, but it sucks. jeanmarc May 2017 #57

I love the chaos bigtree May 2017 #38

Right on, Jeanmarc Erick the Read May 2017 #49

Let's stick together. I'm reading nonsense. NT jeanmarc May 2017 #58

Don't forget the 20 different threads on the same subject Kentonio May 2017 #67

Me neither jeanmarc May 2017 #77

Depends which forum. cstanleytech May 2017 #35

It's either true, or Mensch just ended her career and is about to be sued. StrictlyRockers May 2017 #44

I'm recruiting for breathless apologists Comrade Donald May 2017 #46

Speculation can sometimes be useful Warpy May 2017 #47

Ah yes, Fitzmas. What a colossal waste of time and energy. progressoid May 2017 #90

Amen..... chillfactor May 2017 #48

I think that speculation should be severly regulated ashling May 2017 #50

Speculation is fine as long as it's presented as speculation. Kablooie May 2017 #51

Well said, bigtree. I find the effort by some to shut down OnDoutside May 2017 #52

Bullshit sources have been banned from this forum for essentially its' entire history. LeftyMom May 2017 #53

Think about it... bathroommonkey76 May 2017 #59

I would be very wary of those persons and reports. Take it with a grain of salt. boston bean May 2017 #62

We do have a forum called "Creative Speculation." That's where all the 9/11 CTs go. I think seaglass May 2017 #63

"Information can go through many barriers" Snarkoleptic May 2017 #64

how to tell the difference from fake news??? beachbum bob May 2017 #65

Well, if it's in the NYT, it's not fake................Oh, wait. WinkyDink May 2017 #72

The issue: Some on DU are still using Pre-45 Forum Classification Constructs MedusaX May 2017 #66

YES! and Trump/Russia is a REAL CONSPIRACY not a conspiracy THEORY. Madam45for2923 May 2017 #73

It's beyond ridiculous. They would have us reading nothing of "Watergate" until the published book, WinkyDink May 2017 #71

or waited more than twenty years when "Deep Throat" real identity came out. Madam45for2923 May 2017 #74

Watergate came out in the WaPo, the nightly news, congressional hearings, etc. LeftyMom May 2017 #82

Yep, and if you don't like "speculation" posts, "Trash this thread" is your friend. GoCubsGo May 2017 #75

Depends my friend. DemocratSinceBirth May 2017 #76

If Trump had released his taxes and was not hiding his collusions we would not need speculation. Madam45for2923 May 2017 #78

Who has suggested such a thing? MineralMan May 2017 #79

Thanks MM! Good to know that people are not calling for banning. Madam45for2923 May 2017 #80

K&R mcar May 2017 #81

I thought that was already obvious. librechik May 2017 #83

Speculation is a fickle thing. Glassunion May 2017 #85

Absolutely not...we are busy enough with juries without having to sort out Demsrule86 May 2017 #87

Funny how many on that mission ran around here spreading RT bullshit forever. JTFrog May 2017 #91

If ALL speculation was banned from this forum, Skinner could eliminate this forum altogether. Solly Mack May 2017 #92