But see that's it WhereWasI - who are you to tell people that what they say is invalid just because it's not what you were looking for? By invalid, saying to her (and others) that they don't have a point, they spoke without thinking, they didn't have a reason to speak.

In this case, Swamp said was on her mind, and it was a valid statement - an observation that was made while listening to everyone here. You didn't get what she was saying, so once again you made it about you and started in on her to get her to spell it out for you. Just because you didn't get it, doesn't mean that others didn't, and you didn't need to tell her to get off her "high horse" because you took offense to her words.

The only one who is "spamming" now is you -  I will not have you responding to her with the same repetitive drivel that you have been sprouting in this conversation to everyone else. You ought to be ashamed of yourself to go after people in the manner that you are doing in an effort to get a (negative) reaction from people.

"She proved her own point invalid by being incapable of answering a simple question about her statement. Her responses prove that quite thoroughly."

"She didn't say anything at all until I asked her. She made a vague comment at no specified person with no specified meaning. That's speaking with no point. When asked what her point was she got defensive... probably because she had no real point. I didn't make it about me, I made it about her comments. Was her answer different because I was the one asking? Possibly, but that's not of my concern. Finally, if others claim they got something she didn't understand or specify herself, then they're lying to you and/or themselves."

"The amount of thought put into my questions takes far more mental capacity than vague generic statements and accusations because I can defend my reason for asking them. I asked those questions because I'm targeting comments made without thinking and trying to remove them. So what will you do about my responses since you won't stand for them? My well thought out responses? Call them spam? Laughable. Tell me I can't do something you're doing yourself right now? Hypocrisy."

No, I don't have to thank God for that. There are people capable of making conversation without alienating everyone as soon as they approach the streets. Street conversations are supposed to entertain new ideas and provoke thought, yes, but not by attacking the person or putting words in their mouths because it's not what they wanted to hear.

Asking for clarification is fine, but that isn't what is happening here. I know the difference, and I think you do too Ziva. But sometimes when people want to be entertained, they are willing to let certain things slide for the sake of "activity".

Its ok Blaise, I have nothing but the deepest pity in my heart for such a misguided soul. I've no doubt in my mind that most everyone here understood me as I intended to be understood. He thinks getting in the last word validates him somehow. As I said in the beginning, the more things change around here, the more they stay the same.

"And comments of this nature should be studied. She returns to the statement. Please explain WHO and WHAT. You imply I never stop talking... but then you know nothing of my bloodline. My bloodline has been relatively mute for almost a fucking year before myself."

It's not hypocrisy - wanting people to be able to have a say without harassment is not the same as standing over them and giving them the third degree because they dared to say something.

I've been through this Blaise, I really don't see much of an attack there.

He asks her to specify her point, he asks her to explain it, he asks her to defend it, but it's not really an attack on her. It's more saying, if you have something to say, come out and fucking say it, don't dance around the point. Which I think is a fair thing to say.

I stand by what I said, Blaise. If you have something to say, be prepared to defend it, be prepared to argue it. Don't back down and complain when challenged. If you believe it enough to say it, stand for it.

No, I don't have to thank God for that. There are people capable of making conversation without alienating everyone as soon as they approach the streets. Street conversations are supposed to entertain new ideas and provoke thought, yes, but not by attacking the person or putting words in their mouths because it's not what they wanted to hear.

Asking for clarification is fine, but that isn't what is happening here. I know the difference, and I think you do too Ziva. But sometimes when people want to be entertained, they are willing to let certain things slide for the sake of "activity".

"No, you don't have to thank God. You have to thank the men and women who were capable of thinking before you who made a system for you to mindlessly follow. Name one speaker forcing the activity I have in the past 6 months. I dare you. The streets are alive for now, resting upon my shoulders and those of a few others. This is a common thing related to the bursts of street activity. I'm trying to end the fact that it only comes in bursts and make it last. I'm not attacking people, I'm attacking a lack of thought. Until you can understand the difference, you'll always think I'm attacking you, and therefor I feel no pity for my 'victims'."

"It is what's happening, it's literally all I did with my first comment her way, and you clearly don't if you can't see that. I don't do it for my entertainment, I do it to give life to something I want to thrive."

"It is hypocrisy for you to pass judgement on someone for passing judgement."

I understand you clearly, WWI. I don't agree with your methods. I don't think we need to be mentally bullied in order to get us to express our opinions. Who does that - only an argumentative person would subject themselves to that sort of abuse for having an opinion.

And I see everything clearly now. By giving you attention, we contribute to the issue. If we deal with the topics(s) at hand and bypass all of this other drivel that you are throwing, then maybe we can have some decent conversation.

This conversation wasn't started by you, and people had differing viewpoints that didn't need you constantly going after them for it. All you are doing is making people not want to say anything at all, until there is only the outspoken people left. And isn't the whole point of street activity is to get people...more street active? Now you (and I guess Ziva) want them to talk in a certain way too? Yeah okay.

I understand you clearly, WWI. I don't agree with your methods. I don't think we need to be mentally bullied in order to get us to express our opinions. Who does that - only an argumentative person would subject themselves to that sort of abuse for having an opinion.

"Judge me as you will, but until someone can come up with a better answer to 'how can we revive the streets effectively?' I'll continue my crusade that will benefit you and everyone else, but do not mistake the fact I do it for myself for the same reason we all make every choice we make with only the mindset of our own universes at setting."

And I see everything clearly now. By giving you attention, we contribute to the issue. If we deal with the topics(s) at hand and bypass all of this other drivel that you are throwing, then maybe we can have some decent conversation.

"I truly hope you can, but if you can't see the value in what I'm doing then I truly doubt you fully see the bigger picture."

This conversation wasn't started by you, and people had differing viewpoints that didn't need you constantly going after them for it. All you are doing is making people not want to say anything at all, until there is only the outspoken people left. And isn't the whole point of street activity is to get people...more street active? Now you (and I guess Ziva) want them to talk in a certain way too? Yeah okay.

"I'm making people who make comments without thinking want to say nothing at all. That's my intent. If one comes in with an open mind and asks questions I give some leeway, but thoughtless statements, whether they're made from following a set guideline or just speaking in generalities, should be squashed for encouraging a system of thoughtlessness being acceptable. If you don't think I'm getting people active in the streets, go check out the two conversations I put so much effort in. How many people have listened (views)? How many people have spoken in comparison to the average conversation? I want them to think before they speak. That's what separates mankind from the animals."

The only way the street activity will have any longevity is if the current leaders encourage their members to participate in said streets. When Cantona made his initial speech, it got the streets buzzing. When the current Staten Island leaders made their speeches, that prompted more people to not only participate, but to initiate their own speeches.

To me, making observations is not, "not thinking". Not speaking a long monologue and treating every word spoken like a philosophical paper is not, "not thinking".  Not thinking is when people randomly come in and insult others (like that guy who was struck down by the gods not too long ago).

And since this conversation has grossly went off topic, I will not contribute to the matter anymore. If you are so great in getting people to talk WWI, start your own conversation down the block there and let's see how well you can get people to speak then. I'm sure it won't be a problem. Maybe someone there can help you get your own radio show or something...

Blaise shrugs

Swamp_Rat, I've known you a while, and I can quite honestly say here, you need to wise up. This is not you being attacked. This is you being asked, if you believe in something enough, stand by it.

It's not a big deal (well, it wasn't. You seem determined to make it one, mind) and it's not something to get upset over (although you clearly are, since you keep coming back for more, and frankly you get a shade more sanctimonious for each time you DO come back). You, nor what you are saying, is worth more because you don't wish to get involved in standing by it. I guess what we say isn't worth more because we do the opposite.

What IS true though, is that you have made a comment, then when had your comment commented upon, made out like all debate in the streets is set up to upset/belittle/whatever people; it's not, but this kind of bullshit crying over next to nothing is probably one of the reasons the streets died in the first place.

Take a look at yourself. If you'd been willing to get in to what you said when WhereWasI questioned it, we could now all be having a pretty interesting debate. We might actually go some way to improving this thing of ours. But, a fuss got kicked up, accusations of bullying where thrown around (To which I can only say, wtf? Are we seriously at the point now where asking someone to get deeper into what they are saying is bullying? I can't bloody WAIT for the controversial war speech, or the next time someone makes a public criticism of a person or a bloodline, on something other than just what they're saying - you're gonna have a field day telling people they're bullying there when they get into it) and now we're all very entrenched in a fucking pointless conversation.

This conversation we are having now is pointless. The conversation we might've had if you reacted differently, may actually have been positive for this thing of ours. Saying that isn't a lack of respect, it's saying it how it is.

If you think what you're saying deserves respect, then be damn well willing to make sure it gets it, to make your argument impossible to disrespect.

And I thought that you were above taking things so overly personally. I thought you had more sense than that.

Blaise - we've already GOTTEN to the point where there is pretty much only the outspoken left. The people who are trying to comment now are the people who genuinely want to be here, who genuinely want to make things better. The fun left in doing this is minimal, because for the most part, trying to get a decent discussion going is like getting blood from a stone. So what we have a certain style? We HAVE to have a certain style, because sometimes that's the only way to get enough of a rise from people to get them off their arses and out here speaking for themselves.

If you don't like our style, go ahead and better it, but bitching about how we do things... sweetie, that doesn't make the way you do them ANY better.

I'm pretty sure you two can both do better than kick off over... nothing.

Your need to be right and so ignorant, yet arrogant is very disturbing. I was not addressing you to begin with, I was speaking to the writer of the topic, and to some degree the public. I find your comments to me downright offensive, and they are the types of comments that keep the streets quiet. If you don't like what I say, fine, but there is no need to attack me personally. I have not done anything to deserve it, and I in return am defending myself. You have not added anything useful to what I had to say.

"My need to be right is my need to think. Did you address the writer or the public? If you addressed the public, which portion of the public? You find questions offensive? Then you just want to say something without any possible consequence for saying something without thinking. I'm not attacking you personally, I'm attacking your actions the same way I would anyone else who chose those actions. Literally... anyone. You spoke without thinking, then snapped when asked questions. You're not defending yourself. You're defending your right to speak without thinking, and you're right about me not adding anything useful to what you had to say because you're still yet to say who or what you're talking about.

I will also add, that myself and WhereWasI's bloodlines have had very public disagreements before. It's not the nicest experience, he's a smart guy and his line are all of that way of being, but at the end of the day, he doesn't ask you to do anything different in terms of defending your own points than he's willing to do defending his.

In some ways, he's one of the best out there to get into it with. He's smart, it's not an easy ride, and it's pretty damn interesting to watch.

Ziva - you can be a bully for your cause all you want - it doesn't make what you "stand for" look good at all. If you honestly think bullying people to do "better" is all the rage, then you can have at it.

And it must not be "over... nothing" if you felt the need to repeatedly comment on this recent turn of conversation.

Did you address the writer or the public? If you addressed the public, which portion of the public?

It's a philosophy class, I swear.... or maybe a speech/debate class?

Yet AGAIN Blaise, challenging somebody, asking them to stand by their point, is not bullying them.

You two coming out crying and trying to manipulate the discussion emotionally and by throwing accusations around rather than actually, y'know, backing up random thoughts with something of substance (which really, with the general nature of the original statement, would've been about as hard as taking a shit), that is what doesn't make things look good.

People are not being "bullied" into doing better. People are being challenged to actually say something that makes a difference.

Obviously, you can't particularly handle that. Obviously, you're quite happy with people just floating out random bits of half hearted rubbish and having them be patted on the head and told that they're doing a fantastic job for basically, having a bad attack of word vomit.

If you want the streets - and our world too really, I guess, to be all about holding hands, saying "good job!" and insisting that everybody is a winner... you have at that.

We all live, we all die. I don't see the point in doing that if we can't say or do things that actually mean something along the way.

The only way the street activity will have any longevity is if the current leaders encourage their members to participate in said streets. When Cantona made his initial speech, it got the streets buzzing. When the current Staten Island leaders made their speeches, that prompted more people to not only participate, but to initiate their own speeches.

"You need to read up on your history... the streets (Role Playing) came before the need for Crew Leaders in this thing of ours. Did it get things buzzing more than my comments? I guess that's up for judgement but I'll point to any of his other speeches not meeting such success and claim it was my comments that gave it this much attention. Initiate more auth speeches that few ever really read all the way through? Lovely."

To me, making observations is not, "not thinking". Not speaking a long monologue and treating every word spoken like a philosophical paper is not, "not thinking".  Not thinking is when people randomly come in and insult others (like that guy who was struck down by the gods not too long ago).

"She's not making an observation without observing. Observing requires specifics. General statements come from piles of observations, not vice versa and the statement has to actually apply for it to be relevant in a conversation. You don't have to invest much thought into each conversation to be deemed not thinking, but in a discussion that I'm involved in I will force you to think much harder than what it takes to make your hand move a pencil. Don't mention that man if you want a reaction, because I'm not allowed to talk of him positively and I won't do so negatively so I won't speak of him at all."

And since this conversation has grossly went off topic, I will not contribute to the matter anymore. If you are so great in getting people to talk WWI, start your own conversation down the block there and let's see how well you can get people to speak then. I'm sure it won't be a problem. Maybe someone there can help you get your own radio show or something...

"I'm not welcome to start my own ventures in the way I would like to. Negative responses and lack of responses from some on my most recent ideas have told me that those at the top would most likely strike me down for doing what I truly think would cause heads to turn and I won't let those who would try to help my cause get punished for my vision."

Of course you have the right to come out and say whatever Swamp_Rat. But... he has the right to come out and ask you to go further on that. He has the right to challenge you on your opinions. He has the right to do that, without being told he's "mentally bullying" someone. If you want to say something and you don't want to keep it going... It's probably better to just say your piece and have done with it, rather than keep coming back to argue meaningless and off the point stuff. And if you don't want to be challenged, or you're going to take being challenged so personally, it probably is better for everybody involved that you either don't say it, or you say it privately. In a public arena, things are open to challenge. Some of us go at it more directly than others. Personally, I have a lot of respect for that. I'd rather it to fannying about the point. But at the end of the day, one way or another, if you speak out, hopefully it SHOULD either contribute or cause debate. And if it does both, you can probably say you're doing a good job of things.