I have a Question?
Posted: Mon May 01, 2006 11:38 am
This forum (I thought) was to encourage debate about issues. Instead a pattern has evolved, which is very disheartening.
Why is the person who asks a 'tough' question becomes the topic, opposed to discussing the issue? Their background is scrutinized and the mud slinging begins. I would prefer that energy discussing the topic and offer solutions. Am I off-base? or what am I missing?
Why does the person asking a question have to undergo a background check, have their personal lives and personal history scrutinized? Is this the new criteria for asking a question in town? Have we really sunk to this level? It appears so-which is why the quality of postings and participation has diminished.
And before you all begin- some may accuse me of being guilty. However, I try to tell the facts-based on research and never resort to character assassination to get my point across.
NO ONE is 100% knowlegeable about 100% of the facts, 100% of the time.
In my opinion, this is the main obstacle dividing the town.
It isn't new vs. old or the haves vs. the have nots.
It's become the question askers vs. defenders then progresses to
defenders of one position vs. the dirt diggers and mud slingers.
There is alot of fact twisting intertwined with mudslinging-and the facts get lost. Instead "who's accused of what" becomes the new topic.
Thoughts?
Why is the person who asks a 'tough' question becomes the topic, opposed to discussing the issue? Their background is scrutinized and the mud slinging begins. I would prefer that energy discussing the topic and offer solutions. Am I off-base? or what am I missing?
Why does the person asking a question have to undergo a background check, have their personal lives and personal history scrutinized? Is this the new criteria for asking a question in town? Have we really sunk to this level? It appears so-which is why the quality of postings and participation has diminished.
And before you all begin- some may accuse me of being guilty. However, I try to tell the facts-based on research and never resort to character assassination to get my point across.
NO ONE is 100% knowlegeable about 100% of the facts, 100% of the time.
In my opinion, this is the main obstacle dividing the town.
It isn't new vs. old or the haves vs. the have nots.
It's become the question askers vs. defenders then progresses to
defenders of one position vs. the dirt diggers and mud slingers.
There is alot of fact twisting intertwined with mudslinging-and the facts get lost. Instead "who's accused of what" becomes the new topic.
Thoughts?