Adversarial games

Anyone whom I think believes SST to be an adversarial game will be banned as a troll. pl

This entry was posted in Administration. Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to Adversarial games

  1. turcopolier says:

    richardstevenhack
    SST is a seminar, not an arena for gladiatorial combat. Those who come here to fight will be banned. clear? pl

  2. Ex 11B says:

    “SST is a seminar, not an arena for gladiatorial combat.”
    Plenty of other places for that. Some seem to relish such verbal combat but I find it tiresome.I find a well run board with civil discourse refreshing thus my oldest remaining bookmark points straight here.
    Unfortunately your fame proceeds you and I see intent in other quarters to come challenge the bear in his cave. Some seem to find no value in objective or probing discourse. Some even seem to fear it.

  3. Robert says:

    The firing of Barry Lynn was due to his written endorsement of stronger anti-trust measures, esp. towards Google. If Lynn expected to bite the hand that funds him and get away with it, he was delusional. You can get away with that in the bubble of the academic world but not the real one.

  4. turcopolier says:

    DH
    I will have to think about that. It would be a lot of additional work. pl

  5. John Minnerath says:

    I was pleased to see this comment about folks who only come here to play adversary.
    It is indeed tiresome.
    This is Colonel Lang’s Outpost, show some respect.

  6. scott s. says:

    DH
    I would submit there are plenty of sites devoted to study of the civil war. As far as Lincoln, I don’t know anyone who would consider Lincoln “all that”, at least at the operational level. I think though he comes off well compared to Jeff Davis, who after all had been a regular army officer in both the infantry and dragoons, COL of a volunteer infantry regiment in the Mexican War as well as Secy of War.
    I recommend “Civil War Books and Authors” blog which announces and reviews new releases in ACW military (and to some less extent social) history.

  7. DH says:

    Thank you, Colonel.
    Thanks, scott s. I’m really at the level of picture book maps of major battles…I regret my lack of knowledge.

  8. DH says:

    “Not to mention the gutlessness and lack of intellectual integrity displayed by the New American Foundation. “Money talks, intellectual integrity walks.””
    What else to expect from a bipartisan neoliberal think tank. They’ve re-branded themselves as New America.

  9. Fellow Traveler says:

    A blogger who was an active commenter at Philip Carter’s old Intel Dump (besides SST and Krugman, the only anti-Iraq War blog back in the day) has a whole series on “Decisive Battles”. He’s covered the CW, but IDK the key to sort his posts. An example:
    http://firedirectioncenter.blogspot.com/2014/03/decisive-battles-glorieta-pass-1863.html

  10. DH says:

    Thanks, FT…appreciate it!

  11. Freudenschade says:

    Col.,
    How then do you explain “Tyler?” You have in the past confessed a soft spot for him because he represents a “fighting culture.” I’m suffering from a bit of rhetorical whiplash here.

  12. turcopolier says:

    freudenschade
    The restriction applies to people who come to SST to do battle with me. pl

Comments are closed.