As the person in question there are a number of reasons

1) To change minds
First and foremost I seek to make European Liberals understand American Liberal Leaders are corrupt, to teach American Liberals that their ideals won't work;

2) To reinforce Conservatives
Barring #1 I seek to strengthen those weak in the ways of the Conservative Cause.

3) To goat the unchanging
Those people so brainwashed that conversion won't be possible... I work to make them grind their teeth. The hope is to make them stop parroting what they have heard, but to think for themselves. That is when they become susceptible to conversion.

4) Learning
Over the last 12 years I have experimented at different levels at many different venues. Some experiments worked at incredible levels, others were less so successful.

As part of this learning I found having the perfect argument with no holes gets no talk, as the opposition will avoid it for various reasons.

I also learned the power of being in front of a new group, and hpw to stay there.

I also learned one of the best tools is a quiet trap where you make an apparent flaw for others to abuse, repeat the error... but know someone else will 'plug the hole'.

Especially on this site I used a variety of experiments including identifying cheaters and aligning with them (subculture), various posting methods, various levels of kindness to cruelness, etc.

I however did suffer severe depression at times, especially at times of bad news/events and this did lead to issues.

5) Observation
Back when more were participating I would start threads to see how people would post, to watch patterns, to identify ideologies. Through this effort I knew Sitting Duck would focus on the first tangible excuse in the global warming effort, and when called on it h would fightt a little before seeking another refuge as I pulled out a more delibeate argument. I also knew if I went to sgrong from the start he would simply avoid any debate. Since I want him to read some, and try hard to advance his side (thus using critical thinking) I prmoted weakness from the start. Since he saw some elements which may help him change his mind with later it was a calculated win via usage of previous observation.

6) Recruiting
This was a goal as of five years ago. I realized that the right needs to organize, so I set out to seek to induce recruits to the cause as appropriate.

7) Self Training
I need to be able to argue my points, my efforts in global warming have increased, as have other efforts. To further my skills is essential if I am going to try to complete all of the above.

There you have it. I hope it enlightens. I have been an activist since 1986 and an online activist since 2000. Since I had only what I saw of Reagan for mentoring I had to learn all on my own.

The perfect argument is now there, and they refuse to examine it.

All holes are closed now, but they talk about my opening six, because they have no means to counter the new stuff.

I could try goating one to read. But the amount of effort required would exceed the benefits derived from it. In short my letting the thread drop allows me to hit other topics. The Permament Activist does not relent, does not pause, does not try to force someone to much for they will respond negatively.

You should talk. I chalked you up as a hardcore avoider long ago.

> Einstein wrote:

> You should talk. I chalked you up as a hardcore avoider long ago.

I can name a few examples where you have avoided a question by myself, and responded with some poorly constructed insult...but then again, I think we have all done that at some point...

This is just an opinion of mine, and in my current mood I have found myself upset EVERYONE around me (so I wanna point out that I am not trying to insult), but I feel that you post so much in order to dominate...I get the feeling that you like to control the politics forums (power hungry perhaps? I know I am )

This forum did gain some posters...there is Zarf, xeno, myself...Zarf and I are fairly regular...

Like I said, not designed to be insulting...I like to focus more on international politics, and lately it is US domestic politics (seriously, of little interest to me politic system, sure, but who is leading and who said what...boooooooooring!). Maybe I can start doing my own postings on Chinese politics?! (actually, I think there is an election coming later this year, or might even be next year)

> Einstein wrote:

> Without me... this forum see's a thread a month on average I suspect.

With me discourse happens.

One thing to remember... quantity of threads doesn't necessarily mean activity.

If only one thread exists in a month, but that thread is getting upwards of 100 posts debating a signle issue, it's a debate worth keeping because it means participants are much more likely to be delving deep into said issues, and much more likely to be analyzing those issues than they would be analyzing any issues if said forum was, say, solely consisting of 20 threads with less than 10 posts each.

Not that I discount the value of having lots of new threads.  Specifically, with a giant pile of threads written, participants are more likely to find a topic that collectively interests them, resulting in giant discussions.  That being said:
1: Sometimes, new topic development can retract from existing topics.  If, for example, I already have a thread reaching 100 posts and still going, new threads would require I reduce my posting in the massive thread in order to consider the other threads.  The result?  Loss of argument depth in the massive post.
2: One interesting consideration when observing the forum records... it seems like the two people who tend to most often get in depth debates (for my review, I simply defiined "in depth" as "any thread with at least 100 posts... I didn't go and read every individual topic for quality posts) are you (though I noticed most of the highly active threads were global warming threads) and xeno.  Xeno, in contrast, posts maybe one or two topics a month.  However, the topics he selects tend to much more often attract large audiences (okay, yes, he attracts large audiences because it's one of the few scenarios in which he gets everyone from every side of the political spectrum to unite against him, but that's still argumentation and analysis) .

So no... lots of threads does not necessarily mean lots of debate.  Those first few posts are generally more often than not simply talking point repetitions, which are later forced to be evaluated once the debate starts to heat up.

> Einstein wrote:

> As the Russian military once said:

Quantity has a Quality of its own!

Socialist!

That is how i shall now address you, Flint the socialist! ha so it will stick!

Awww... I wanted to call Godwin's Law on you!  No fair self-calling it! X(

Zarf said:

>(okay, yes, he attracts large audiences because it's one of the few scenarios in which he gets everyone from every side of the political spectrum to unite against him, but that's still argumentation and analysis)

Hmm. 

This is true to an extent now that I think of it.  Everyone, regardless of their ideological tendencies, tends to attack my point of view before considering its soundness or validity, and do so with personal attacks, too.  Is it because it hit the hot-topics, push the right (no pun intended) buttons or something?

> Zarf BeebleBrix wrote:

> > xeno syndicated wrote:

>> before considering its soundness or validity

>Are you SURE you want to go with that? 

Why, Zarf?  Is there something wrong with the soundness or validity of the statement? 

lol

Well, if you were to consider the soundness and validity of the statement that people don't consider the soundness and / or validity of my positions, I might have to revisit the statement and reconsider its validity and / or soundness myself, and thus you'd win the argument!  So...what's it going to be, Zarf?