how many posts...

[Jamie Robertson]

...will the next discussion regarding US/middle east relations last before it is closed?
50 friendly posts +
10 people trying to troll +
5 from Jim telling the participants to watch it or it will be closed +
20 posts off topic +
2 from a successful troll
---------------------------
87 posts till the next topic on terrorism or related subjects is closed
any other guesses?

[Paul Stevens]

What is the over/under?

[Paavam Payyan]

From what I have witnessed, US-Israel debates will survive a little bit longer, where as Palestine-Israel, Pakistan-India debates are ill-fated right from post #1, as per Javaranch policies!
No offence meant to any one, and I even understand the reason or logic to this behaviour (or if you state that this is not the fact)!

[Thomas Paul]

I think Pakistan-India debates don't have a prayer of lasting more than 10 posts.

[Sameer Jamal]

Originally posted by Thomas Paul:
I think Pakistan-India debates don't have a prayer of lasting more than 10 posts.

Yes Because Jason Menard Alias Thomas Paul is not interested in such type of topic and he is the biggest contributer in these threads

[Jim Yingst]

No, it's that certain topics just seem to be more likely to inspire unfriendly posts. Take this thread - only two posts after Paavam mentions India and Pakistan, we have you, insulting others without provocation. Congratulations, good example. :roll: I would have simply deleted your post, but you'd have just blamed Thomas I'm sure...

[Anonymous]

Originally posted by Jim Yingst:
No, it's that certain topics just seem to be more likely to inspire unfriendly posts. Take this thread - only two posts after Paavam mentions India and Pakistan, we have you, insulting others without provocation. Congratulations, good example. :roll: I would have simply deleted your post, but you'd have just blamed Thomas I'm sure...

I don't think that post warranted to be deleted ! i think he was merely stating the obvious fact , based on statistics , looking at the number of posts certain individuals would have made on a certain thread, similar statistics to the one that started the thread.
Maybe the tone in which it was stated above , would have suggested insulting someone. Well maybe .,
:roll:

[Sameer Jamal]

Originally posted by Jim Yingst:
No, it's that certain topics just seem to be more likely to inspire unfriendly posts. Take this thread - only two posts after Paavam mentions India and Pakistan, we have you, insulting others without provocation. Congratulations, good example. :roll: I would have simply deleted your post, but you'd have just blamed Thomas I'm sure...

I never meant to insult anyone, I am against such type of threads just want to show who are the people who contribute most to these type of threads

[Sameer Jamal]

Originally posted by <Troll>:

Maybe the tone in which it was stated above , would have suggested insulting someone. Well maybe .,
:roll:

If my tone seems to be insulting someone then I am really sorry I didnt meant that actually it is because of poor english

[Jim Yingst]

Ah. It appears I overreacted then. I think I was reacting mostly to the "alias" part of your message really. I think of Jason and Thomas as two rather distinct individuals, neither of whom would see any need to masquerade as someone else. And I were one of them, I think I'd be at least a bit annoyed at such an implication. Perhaps you meant it less literally, meaning something like "Thomas and Jason and people like them". Which I guess is not necessarily an insult...
I guess I now tend to expect people to eventually start throwing insults in these threads - and so when a post is ambiguous, I'm more likely to interpret it as an attack. Probably I'm not alone in this. There's probably a useful lesson here somewhere. Sorry for the mixup - carry on...

[Mapraputa Is]

This brings us to Shura's signature:
"Any posted remarks that may or may not seem offensive, intrusive or politically incorrect are not truly so."

[Sameer Jamal]

Originally posted by Mapraputa Is:
This brings us to Shura's signature:
"Any posted remarks that may or may not seem offensive, intrusive or politically incorrect are not truly so."

This is another example of ambigous sentence

[Anonymous]

"The basic tool for the manipulation of reality is the manipulation of words. If you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use the words." (Philip K.Dick)

[Jason Menard]

Originally posted by Sameer Jamal:

Yes Because Jason Menard Alias Thomas Paul is not interested in such type of topic and he is the biggest contributer in these threads

What have I got to do with this. Leave me out of it. I'm not Thomas Paul, and he's not me. I assume his ip resolves to New York, and my IP resolves to the Washington DC area, if we were the same people then all the bartenders and Sheriffs would be in on it too, since they can see our ip addresses. Hell, we even disagree over many things, unless you believe that is all part of the front you think we are putting on. :roll:
It seems the people who take offense to things either of us have said are also the same people who have at one time or another masqueraded as various anonymous posters. Coincidence?