The costs of running this huge site are paid for by ads. Please consider registering and becoming a Supporting Member for an ad-free experience. Thanks, ECF team.

Presidential Candidates that are pro vaping?

Discussion in 'Campaigning discussions' started by Jman8, Jan 30, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Image has been removed.
URL has been removed.
Email address has been removed.
Media has been removed.
  1. Jman8

    Jman8 Vaping Master ECF Veteran

    Jan 15, 2013
    Wisconsin
    There was never a point in discussing. Not what this thread was made for. I'll understand if you are done trolling.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  2. aceswired

    aceswired Ultra Member Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Oct 3, 2013
    Minnesota
    Thinking differently from me = trolling.

    Sigh.

    Sent from my SM-T320 using Tapatalk
     
  3. WhiteHighlights

    WhiteHighlights Ultra Member Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Sep 26, 2013
    Boston, MA, USA
    Aces, the OP asked:
    The point wasn't whether this is a significant issue or not compared to others. I'm not a single issue voter, but in my lovely state of MA, I have 2 senators (and an AG) who signed on to letters to the FDA urging control of e-cigs and one senator who said on the senate floor that e-cig companies should be put out of business. These actions tell me a lot about how they approach governance. There are many other reasons I won't vote for these lunatics but their position and actions about vaping are illuminating.
     
    • Like Like x 8
  4. aceswired

    aceswired Ultra Member Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Oct 3, 2013
    Minnesota
    I am aware. Threads evolve. Discussions digress and detour. Surely you aren't proposing that every thread be strictly limited to the precise point or question of the original post. What a dull and dreadful forum that would make.

    Sent from my SM-T320 using Tapatalk
     
  5. Luisa

    Luisa Super Member ECF Veteran

    Apr 8, 2010
    harlingen,texas
  6. Jman8

    Jman8 Vaping Master ECF Veteran

    Jan 15, 2013
    Wisconsin
    Surely you aren't suggesting trolling is okay in this thread.
     
  7. aceswired

    aceswired Ultra Member Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Oct 3, 2013
    Minnesota
    Again, your definition of trolling appears to be, "having an opinion different from mine."

    You're threadcopping. "Post the way I wish you to, and if you don't, I'll brand it trolling."

    Is an opposing viewpoint really so threatening to you? Why are you so eager to label honest debate trolling? Do you know what trolling actually is? (Here's a hint - in that I'm trying to discuss, while you're just posting dismissive comments, you're closer to it than I am).

    Sent from my SM-T320 using Tapatalk
     
  8. Jman8

    Jman8 Vaping Master ECF Veteran

    Jan 15, 2013
    Wisconsin
    Not even close. You've stated that your opinion is this is not a big deal (for presidential elections). That was never the intent of this thread. You've stated this around 8 times. Your latest post before the trolling accusation by me said:

    So, let me know what you feel like discussing that is still on point with this thread.

    I guess we could let a moderator sort things out if you feel I'm doing something grossly in error. I think you are trolling at this point. If there is something you still wish to discuss that is on point with what is stated in OP, please share. If it is off topic, and because I am OP, I may report it, especially given an attitude of I'm the one doing something wrong on this thread.

    If you care to discuss how important of an issue vaping is in the scheme of things, I have another thread in this sub-forum just for that. There, whatever honest disagreements we might have would be able to be fully explored and not be trolling. I just wonder if you'd be handle that discussion.
     
  9. aceswired

    aceswired Ultra Member Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Oct 3, 2013
    Minnesota
    Ahh, so we're back to, "any discussion not 100 percent on line with the question in the original post is trolling." Gotcha. I think roughly 99 percent of the forum will disagree that threads should never evolve or detour. But Jman says talking about anything else--even a logical extension of the original post--is trolling. So there it is.

    You can't make this stuff up.

    In a fantastic turn of irony, I've not once been debating or discussing this with myself! So then, according to your logic, it's okay to express the opinion that it is important, but it's trolling to express the opinion that it's not.

    Like I said. You're defining trolling as expressing an opinion different from your own. You seem to believe that you expressing your opinion is okay, but because mine is the opposite, that's trolling.

    Let you know, or check in with you on what is allowed to be posted, according to Jman? Because dude, it pretty much feels like the latter.

    Well that's the thing. You seem to be laboring under the impression that there's some great infringement here, that the sanctity of the forum is being violated by the expression of an opinion you don't like. Let's bear in mind that only one of us has taken up needless namecalling (hint: it's not me).

    I'm just not sure how anything here remotely comes close to the threshold of needing a moderator. Can we not disagree like adults without resorting to namecalling and asking a moderator to moderate something that requires no moderation?

    That's because you don't understand what trolling is. You think it's someone posting something you don't like. If arguing one side of this debate is trolling, then arguing the other side is trolling too. You don't get to just pick the side you like better, declare that okay, and say that any opposing viewpoints is trolling.

    By all means. Report it. Do it now. Bring in a mod with the argument that, "yeah, but he's not agreeing with me, and it's MY thread!"

    Oh for god sake, get over yourself. When you post a thread to ECF, it becomes public discourse. You don't own it. Threads evolve. They detour and digress. A thread on whether politicians have declared their positions logically extends to whether they should. You act as if we're discussing whether Pluto should be considered a planet here. This is not a wild tangent. It was a logical growth out of the discussion at hand.

    Get over the idea that you own the thread. It doesn't work that way. Once a thread is out and commented on, it's a community thread. You don't get to dictate which opinions are allowed, or how they're allowed. It's not your sole discretion to allow or disallow the track of the discussion. That's not how public forums work.

    If you want to own it and dictate it, post it to your facebook page. Or start your own forum. Otherwise, grow a thicker skin and stop branding everything you don't like "trolling." It's ridiculous.

    And finally, if you don't want me to express my side of the debate ... Stop. Engaging. Me. Really, this is extremely simple. I'm rather famous for not talking to myself. If you want the discussion to stop, then ... stop. Don't demand I stop when you're unwilling to do so yourself.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  10. nicnik

    nicnik Ultra Member ECF Veteran

    Apr 20, 2015
    Illinois, USA
    Here's a particularly bad article that ends with this:
    http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/281948/vaping-safety/
     
    • Like Like x 2
  11. retired1

    retired1 Administrator Admin Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Supporting member
    Apr 5, 2013
    Texas
    Forum Rules

    13. Message conventions
    Posts made by members must accord with certain conventions.
    a. Posts must be in English, except in the International Language boards.
    b. Off-topic digression: Stick to the topic. Do not deviate from the subject discussed in a thread as this is called off-topic (OT) posting. Open a new thread if a new issue arises from the discussion so others can always see by the title what the thread is about. Do not post the same topic in several forums (no double-posting / cross-posting).
    c. Post titles: The title of a post should accurately refer to the content of the message.
    d. Do not place links in the title. Example: " Find good resources at www.vaping.com ".
    e. Do not place domain names in a post title. Example: " Vaping.com is a great site ".

    'Nuff said.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  12. Jman8

    Jman8 Vaping Master ECF Veteran

    Jan 15, 2013
    Wisconsin
    Hate what this message is conveying, but like that it is on topic of this thread.
     
  13. aceswired

    aceswired Ultra Member Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Oct 3, 2013
    Minnesota
    Deleted my response. This was a dead issue so no point starting again. Jman already invited me to another thread to insult me there.
     
  14. aceswired

    aceswired Ultra Member Verified Member ECF Veteran

    Oct 3, 2013
    Minnesota
    By the way, in the NET thread, the topic de jour is lower back pain....

    Sent from my SM-T320 using Tapatalk
     
  15. nicnik

    nicnik Ultra Member ECF Veteran

    Apr 20, 2015
    Illinois, USA
    • Like Like x 1
  16. Woofer

    Woofer Vaping Master ECF Veteran

    Oct 8, 2014
    PA, SK, CA
  17. nicnik

    nicnik Ultra Member ECF Veteran

    Apr 20, 2015
    Illinois, USA
    The Presidential Candidates’ Positions on Vaping: A Satire

    Funny stuff! The best one:
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. Jman8

    Jman8 Vaping Master ECF Veteran

    Jan 15, 2013
    Wisconsin
    I'd prefer more than inferences to be what I go on in determining where they stand.

    I could see all candidates doing something that would strike us (vaping enthusiasts) as a wrong move, while I still think Dem candidates are more likely to tout themselves as anti-vapers who stood up to BT and thus deserve lots of praise for bringing harsh regulations against the eCig industry. Including Trump, I don't see any Pub candidates doing this.
     
  19. nicnik

    nicnik Ultra Member ECF Veteran

    Apr 20, 2015
    Illinois, USA
    I can certainly see Kasich doing that. He'd also have a very tough time trying to change his position and start being supportive of vaping. It'd be not only a flip-flop, but an admission that he made a dangerous mistake in trying to slap a huge tax on e-liquid in Ohio. What's he supposed to say, that he thanks God for the checks and balances in Government that saved the the thousands of lives of Ohioans his stupid idea would've wiped out?
     
  20. nicnik

    nicnik Ultra Member ECF Veteran

    Apr 20, 2015
    Illinois, USA
    I wonder if SFATA got a form letter in response, or, maybe more likely, no response at all...

    E-cig industry seeks support from 2016 presidential hopefuls
     
    • Like Like x 3
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice