01 Jan 10
Originally posted by zeeblebotRather than people doing the totally unoriginal thing that you suggest, why don't they instead consider this:
<FN1> : use when FMF posts his "argument" 'hang on, who IS this anonymous blogger you're quoting?'
he/her has at least as much credibility as an anonymous poster named "FMF"!
zeeblebot, your cut and pastes are like gormless, artless graffiti. They exhibit contempt for the RHP community. People sometimes write long responses. You answer with one word. Or maybe five. Or a change of topic. And then 2 pages of unoriginal dreck, much of it the pilfered frothing diatribes of anonymous bloggers, probably birthers, paranoics, haters and all the rest.
If you rate their views so highly, why don't you invite the likes of "fredtaylor" and "andy123", and any of the hundreds of others, to join RHP and then air their views here at Debates and let them persuade people. Let people engage them in a dialogue. Simply cutting and pasting whatever they have said somewhere else, when each of their "contributions" is like a sterile Monsanto seed as far as the debate here is concerned, is nothing more than anti-social spamming.
Why not invite each anonymous blogger you are tempted to cite, to join RHP and then let them express themselves here, enter into our debate if they want, and make what they have to say open to cross-examination.
Sorry for this post duplicated from another thread.
