25.06.2010, 11:45
I noticed, in the now locked P-51 FM topic, that some take issue with ACE's "quote-response, quote-response" style of posting.
I would just point out, that this is a standard, accepted, online debating method, wherein you reply, point-by-point, to a previous post. It's really the best way to carry on these discussions, as it relieves the reader of constantly having to scroll up to see what it was that the original poster said, that the subsequent poster is relying to.
I saw in that thread, where ACE was threatened with censorship, not for anything he wrote specifically, but simply for employing the "point-by-point" style of debate. Now if ACE is breaking some other written forum rule, then that is one thing, but surely we are not going to criticize or censure someone for employing a standard method of online debate, are we? That is just so "Old AAA" isn't it?
If someone is going to wade into a topic discussing FM's, then one should not post one's opinion without expecting a rational, point-by-point criticism of their opinion in return. If that's the case, then this entire FM comparing forum is moot. If you can't rationally defend your opinion, then you need to admit that, or not post it in the first place.
I would just point out, that this is a standard, accepted, online debating method, wherein you reply, point-by-point, to a previous post. It's really the best way to carry on these discussions, as it relieves the reader of constantly having to scroll up to see what it was that the original poster said, that the subsequent poster is relying to.
I saw in that thread, where ACE was threatened with censorship, not for anything he wrote specifically, but simply for employing the "point-by-point" style of debate. Now if ACE is breaking some other written forum rule, then that is one thing, but surely we are not going to criticize or censure someone for employing a standard method of online debate, are we? That is just so "Old AAA" isn't it?
If someone is going to wade into a topic discussing FM's, then one should not post one's opinion without expecting a rational, point-by-point criticism of their opinion in return. If that's the case, then this entire FM comparing forum is moot. If you can't rationally defend your opinion, then you need to admit that, or not post it in the first place.
We're all entitled to our opinions, so don't rebuke each other for it 
" , but yet, people took things to heart like it was a personal stab at them, and used the quote as the weapon of choice, which every man knows, no one likes people to use their own words against them. I agree 110% on what you are saying about discussing the mighty field of FM's with a rational, point-by-point criticism of their opinion in return, and the majority expects that, but the whole discussion got side barred when things went from professional to personal, people went on the defensive, myself included, and for what??? Every single one of us looked like children arguing in a playground, hard to believe I will be 43 yrs old in July, huh?? If people would only learn that everything said is not a direct slap in the face then we could wade through this whole FM thing and not put it in the category of : politics, religion, and FMs!! The final thought, in my OPINION the quote thing is good, but not to the point of re-building someones syntax to justify YOUR OWN opinions. It truly would be nice to discuss the whole FM issue, and be able to state an opinion without the fear of starting a word war.
