Some of you may have participated in meta-threads on other sites, but for the uninitiated, it's a thread in which you simply state what you're posting, rather than actually putting your argument.

It's largely for amusement purposes, but I think it may offer interesting views on how we see debate patterns unfold on OLO. Since that might not make sense, I'll just start:

I state a strongly partisan opinion on a controversial issue. To back it up, I offer a selection of links to one-sided websites which share my prejudice, and say that the people who are sure to disagree with me can't handle the truth.

I now add a correction to a spelling error in my previous post which no-one would have noticed anyway, and was probably right in the first place.

I trump Sancho's poor opening gambit with an even more partition UTube video whilst claiming to be able to tell the difference between the real stuff and those so obvious frauds.

R0bert

I mock the seriousness with which the topic is being discussed, and pick a fight with the most arrogant, self important looking poster. I ignore the thrust of their general argument, find a legitimate slip of the toungue to highlight a gender bias and expand to the nth degree to distort their position.

I look for any opportunity to exercise my addiction to bad puns.

In fact, I never metadiscussion I didn't like.

Sancho: "Some of you may have participated in meta-threads on other sites, but for the uninitiated, it's a thread in which you simply state what you're posting, rather than actually putting your argument."

Such patronising condescension!

To suggest that posters on OLO know nothing of mete-threads, or are in any way uninitiated. Does your arrogance exceed your ignorance, or is it the other way round? It's done here all the time!

What really gets up my nose about you types is your passive aggressiveness and snidely gutless evasions as you seek to pretend to debate. As an example, just look at the deliberate use of the word 'toungue' in Usual Suspect's post, sneakily disguised to look like a slip of the tongue. Everyone knows a toungue is a leet term for a pinko feminazi political correctionist. Hasn't got the guts of her convictions.

And what's this drivel about life outside OLO? Other sites? Hogwash!

I would normally agree with Pericles,
"I haven't metadiscussion I didn't like."

This one however, reminds me of
school bully tactics.

That's not what online opinion should
be about.

*That's not what online opinion should
be about*

Ok Foxy, in that case perhaps we should all hold
hands and all sing "Kumbaiya" as we agree
with one another and feel better now :)

Dear Yabby,

You really wouldn't want me to sing,
much as I love to. I'm tone deaf...

And, I'm not suggesting that we have
to agree on everything. On the contrary,
one of the things I love about online
opinion is the diversity of opinion.

What I do object to however, is
school bully tactics as this
metadiscussion is displaying.

That's just my opinion.

Come on Foxy, you're just too, too nice.

My cheek is in absolute agony from having my toungue in it.

Is there nowhere a bloke can go for a bit of absolutely gratuitous biffo?

Dear Forrest,

"Well hush your mouth..."

or as my mammy used to say,

"Honey child, if jo keep a doin what
jo doin, jo'll keep a gettin, what
jo gettin..."

I occasionally start off with set-piece hyperbole/diatribes to find out where we are at in the debate as well as to stir up a bit of comment. Then I dive in to fill the vacant space with logical argument.

PS: Foxy, it's all just a "pisstake" (from the Italian pistako; source Tony Martin of Martin & Molloy fame)

*What I do object to however, is
school bully tactics as this
metadiscussion is displaying.*

Foxy, you really are far too nice!

I don't think that anyone is trying
to bully anyone, but like in the playground,
some of us fellas play a bit rougher then the
girls :)

I think that there is quite a difference between
posters. In my case I have a very dry sense of
humour and never take things personally. OLO is
a fairly gentle place to debate, compared to some
really wild forums like the Guardian etc.

For me its very much about separating emotion from
reason, but some posters do in fact get rather hot
under the collar and become upset :( Well that is
just debate, it can't be helped. If we were all
sensitive little petals, we would not participate
in these debates.

I really appreciate the dry wit of some posters,
the irony etc, they make it worth reading.

Now, yup, some are emotionally engulfed, take it
all very personally, get very angry, but surely
that is their problem that they need to deal with?

Separating emotion from reason is the basis of
emotional intelligence. Some can do it, some
can't. So be it.

I appreciate clever posters and there are quite
a few on OLO. I certainly would not call them
bullies, simply good debaters.

Dear Yabby,

When I read the first couple of posts
on this thread I identified what I
thought was you guys ganging up on
Polycarp. That I thought was unfair.
One on one - fair enough, but all in
together, - I interpreted that as
bullying - plain and simple.

It seems that I got it wrong.
And I apologise.

Have fun.

I post an acknowledgement that I was mocking a certain well known troll but deny any involvement in a gang.

I express regret at having bothered the lovely Foxy.

R0bert

Dear Robert,

As Vanilla would say, "Aw shucks!"

You know that you're greatly admired
for your calm, rational, and
logical posts.

(And your skinny-dipping in mountain
river streams). :)

I post a link to an article I wrote about this on OzPolitic a few years back that clears up everyone's confusion.