4/4     Why do you participate on motd emarkp? It's not like anyone
        here actually agrees with 95% of your opinions and it's not
        like you're providing anything insightful to anyone else. Do
        you actually enjoy circuitous flamewar with us evil liburals?
        You're like that Butters character in South Park. Everyone makes
        fun of him but he still sticks around to be beaten over and
        over again. It is just mind boggling.
        \_ First of all, emarkp is very polite and tends to make more of an
           atempt at rational debate than most people here.  Second of all,
           his ideas are not the mainstream conservative party line you get
           from the drooling foxnews types or the frothing freeper types--his
           contributions are genuinely interesting(if annoying sometimes) and
           I've definitely been led to think about things because of them.
           This is a good thing.  Also, as a fairly extreme liberal, I find
           myself agreeing with him on several very important issues.  And
           on top of all that, Butters if fucking hilarious and makes SP a
           better show.
        \_ I like having emarkp. He is the only rational conservative
           who posts regularly. Why do you want to drive him off? -ausman
           \_ See, this is what precipitated my wall yesterday.  His
              posts yesterday were not his usual even-keel. --scotsman
        \_ I like having emarkp on too.  And if you spell it 'liburals'
           I automatically sort you to 'moron'.
        \_ Violating my own rule to not respond to anonymous trolls...
           Why do you participate?  I joined the CSUA in 1995, and while my
           political and social views differ dramatically from most people in
           Berkeley, I have a healthy respect for their technical prowess.  I
           also find that rational discussion with people who disagree with me
           is the best way to refine and evaluate where I stand and learn to
           articulate it better.  Occasionally I even change my views because
           of discussion here--two examples were 1) my objections to the
           original Lancet article on violent death stats in post-invasion
           Iraq, and 2) holding Evolution off as a scientific fact but not a
           belief of mine (I now accept Evolution without reservation).
           -emarkp
        \_ diversity of opinion is good.  How can there be dark without light?
           why discourage those that think differently from you? You'd prefer
           a boring motd full of yes-men?
        \_ Discussion: good.  Echo chamber: bad.
        \_ emarkp doesn't flood the board with freeper links, and his
           discussions, apart from those with tom, people pretending to be tom,
           or anonymous cowards, tend to be reasonable or at least civil. I do
           not agree with much of what he has to say, but I appreciate his
           tone and ideas. --erikred