[photon]

Originally Posted by To Be Quite Honest

Hence NOBODY posts tidbits of an article in a post they create on this site, amiright?

You didn't say tidbits, you said "the information", which literally means all of it. You're the one making a vague distinction on what someone should and should not be posting, not me.

Originally Posted by To Be Quite Honest

Not everybody has the sarcastic wit of photon. Some people, unlike you, could use a road map.

Sure, and some people care about where the map is leading them. A map's usefulness is related to how accurately it represents reality. As a map of "why", this site's usefulness is highly questionable.

And notice here how you're directing your comments against me, I should take the opportunity to fire back? Is that how rational discussions are supposed to work?

Originally Posted by To Be Quite Honest

Fine example of your great wit that nobody could e v e r achieve.

More insulting.

Originally Posted by To Be Quite Honest

I am Canadian - Help save "Canadian". You can thank Molson for that Canadianism.

Pretty sure people said that before Molson came around, it being a well formed sentence and all.

Originally Posted by To Be Quite Honest

Sometimes people just mean well.

And sometimes people just complain when things don't go the way they want.

Making poor arguments based on poor information means poor conclusions. It's not my job to make the site's author feel warm and fuzzy for having good intentions, they have their parents/siblings/spouse/friends/stuffed animals for that. If they're making poor arguments I can criticize those arguments on that basis. In fact anyone that opposes the UBB would welcome that, since criticizing poor arguments should result in better arguments, which would mean a stronger case for them.

"Bell has no right to decide how much I pay them to access the Internet from them" is not a good argument.

Originally Posted by To Be Quite Honest

If the internet is turned off in their home... They can lose business. I'm just assuming, but I'm not a smart as "photon"... whututhink?

Sure, but no one's talking about turning off the Internet.

I do business over my home Internet. I am fully aware of the caps (which were in place before all this started), and I'm fully aware of the SLAs. I know what my backup is if my Internet is unavailable, and I know what my backup is if my business requirements exceed the capacity of my consumer-grade Internet connection.

If I were running a business over the Internet, I would ensure that my business is not threatened by a single point of failure.

Most business that depend on the Internet has operated on the pay-per-use model for AGES already.

And your back-handed insults directed at me continue, you talk about a moderator's behaviour, when you're the only one here insulting an individual directly.

Originally Posted by To Be Quite Honest

And here, are you acting like a moderator?

If you think I'm not, report my post. The moderators often check with each other to see if they're going over the line or not. That's why moderators try to avoid moderating a thread they are actively participating in.

However I don't think I have violates ANY of the rules of the forum. I'm on the topic of the thread. I haven't insulted you or any forum member (you however have violated the rules of the forum by insulting me backhandedly).

Originally Posted by To Be Quite Honest

Are you creating an example for others to follow photon?

Yes, I would greatly like it if everyone pointed out poorly supported arguments when they occurred and tried to adhere to a standard of good reasoning and good evidence. That's the way adults discuss things IMO.

I would love it if people always attacked the argument rather than, as you seem to be doing, attacking the person.

Originally Posted by To Be Quite Honest

Should follow this fine example of negative behavior?

What negative behaviour? Disagreeing with someone? That's not against the rules, so yes people should disagree when they actually disagree. Pointing out the ridiculousness of poorly formed and supported arguments? Definitely. Use of sarcasm against poor arguments? Sure, depending on the circumstance, I read many posts on this forum with excellent use of sarcasm, none of which have received moderator action. If there was only one bad argument on that site it would have been different, but the poor logic goes on and on and on so sarcasm seemed an appropriate response.

What negative behaviour are you specifically referring to. Maybe quote the exact phrase and specify why you think it's negative.

Originally Posted by To Be Quite Honest

Please allow me to retort by saying this post is mostly you bullying.

Bullying who? I haven't said anything against you or the author of that site, everything I've said is against the CONTENT, the conclusions the site is making. How can you bully words?

Originally Posted by To Be Quite Honest

I posted something here that can point to others that may not know a direction to go. It might not be perfect but I came across it and thought I'd share.

And I never once said that you shouldn't have, or that you shouldn't be able to. You thought it was useful and you posted it. I thought it was poor and I posted that. But somehow you expressing your opinion is ok, but me expressing mine is not? Really?

Originally Posted by To Be Quite Honest

I understand that you are comfy with this ISP change SO STEP ASIDE or post without trying to intimidate others.

Where have I said I'm comfy with the ISP changes? It's not a "if you're not with me you're against me" world, it's possible to have a more nuanced point of view.

I could even agree with the concept of removing the UBB and still be against poorly made arguments you know.

And where have I tried to intimidate others? By disagreeing with them?? Sorry, but if someone is intimidated just because someone disagrees with them or criticizes their arguments because they are poor arguments, then they are the ones that need to step aside; adults should be capable of having their points criticized.

And the arguments I criticized were those made by a website. Am I intimidating the website? I didn't make those comments on the website, so I'm not intimidating the author...

Originally Posted by To Be Quite Honest

Obviously this conversation isn't for you being that the OP has a thumbs down icon suggesting that this is a move he does not agree with which is opposite to your opinion as you have so stated previously.

Sorry, if you think that disagreeing with someone makes you ineligible to participate in a thread, you are really on the wrong forum.

And no it isn't opposite to my opinion, assuming things can make one look foolish.

Originally Posted by To Be Quite Honest

I understand that you want to poke fun at someone who is trying to make a difference but lacks the grasp of grammar and "speeling" that you have.

That's not what I was doing, for the most part I was poking at the poor arguments themselves. And when I was talking about the grammar and spelling, I was actually talking about the grammar and spelling and the site, not poking fun at the person.

Originally Posted by To Be Quite Honest

Perhaps he is an immigrant? Maybe he learned how to type on a cell phone. His voice still has value or there would not be 53 comments of thanks, and posts of what others did to make a difference.

I really don't care why his arguments are poor, just that they are.

Originally Posted by To Be Quite Honest

This post is a low point for you IMO. I tried to have fun with your responses but your last bit was... Tasteless.

*shrug*

If you think making fun of nonsense arguments from a random website is tasteless that's fine, you are welcome to your opinion.