Well dang bro, if, out of all I said, the main thing you came away with was some imagined shared-IP connection between me and Silkie based on something else you saw on the internet, something not even previously discussed in any way, shape, or form, then what is the point of "rational discussion" anyway? With that level of skepticism, what's ever going to get across?jackandcoke said:
It really doesn't take much time or effort to make any number of posts a day, even well-reasoned ones. Throw in some silly ones here and there, and the numbers climb even faster. Most topics are not "life or death."
No, Silkie and I are not married. We are also not one person. I haven't checked out dcrtv.net in a long time. People who have had internet conversations with other people are apt to find out what gender the other person is, if they pay attention, or if they see someone [else] guess wrong, usually because they made the wrong assumption. Assumptions and overgeneralizations, especially ones that are easily proven wrong, are the problem in all forms of conversation, radio or otherwise.
Most of the talk has been quite rational. People just shouldn't make gross overgeneralizations and assumptions, and expect it to never raise a question, especially when they're espousing "critical thinking" but not participating in it.
“Radio, it’s all right once in a while. Otherwise it tends to induce bad values, false dreams, lazy habits. Listening to the radio leads to stories of foolishness and violence. This is no way for a boy to grow up.”
Sorry this post is not full-on about "radio," but it's about people conversing, which is what talk radio should be, so maybe it's about radio on a secondary level? If it's not, feh.
