Evulating the honest Orgah

[Strike For The South]

Well the title is self explanatory. Who do you think is the most honest orgah. Personally I think its me

SFTS-7

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Dave no contest. He too damn honest and pays for it constantly

[Marshal Murat]

Honest in their opinions?

[InsaneApache]

Dave no contest. He too damn honest and pays for it constantly

I agree. Davy all the way!

[rotorgun]

Well the title is self explanatory. Who do you think is the most honest orgah. Personally I think its me

SFTS-1

....and so modest! Is such modesty a normal Texas trait?

[Gawain of Orkeny]

You havent noticed? Ask him who the best football team is

[Pannonian]

You havent noticed? Ask him who the best football team is

Brazil.

[Soulforged]

Brazil.

Argentina... I also vote for Strike.

[Don Corleone]

Strike all the way, baby. Except for that whole Texas v. France thread... He AND Louis both lost points in my book for not acknowledging the points scored by the other.

[Louis VI the Fat]

Strike and I fight with the gloves off!


Besides, you couldn't possibly have missed out on our enduring love affair?
Or rather, I love Strike, and he's desperately trying to get me off his back. (not in a physical sense, mind...)


I take 'honest' to mean speaking his mind most freely, so it's Dave all the way.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Guys I said football not soccer.

I take 'honest' to mean speaking his mind most freely, so it's Dave all the way.

How can there even be an argument here?

2nd would have to be either Jag or Idaho in my book

[Don Corleone]

See, I don't equate steadfast and honest. They're two admirable, but different qualities. I'll grant you Dave is the most consistent member of the board. I find honesty more in people that are willing to admit when they're wrong (something Dave occasionally does) when they recognize that they are, and when they are wcomes illing to admit the weaknesses to their arguments. I'm not saying Dave up short here, and honestly, Strike doesn't lay it on the line enough to really even qualify. I'd have to say of all the Orgahs that really 'get into it', the one most likely to admit a mistake or allow points to the 'other side' would be Lemur, followed closely by Louis (who has a blind spot not necessarily for his country, but for his languge).

[rotorgun]

I am with Don. The Lemur is without question a very honest fellow, if such an opinion garnered from an online forum such as the "backroom" can be taken seriously.

Lemur for president!

[Lemur]

I'd have to say of all the Orgahs that really 'get into it', the one most likely to admit a mistake or allow points to the 'other side' would be Lemur, followed closely by Louis (who has a blind spot not necessarily for his country, but for his languge).

If "honest" means "willing to admit when you're being an idiot," I qualify. And I give myself lots of opportunities by being an idiot with regularity.

There's no harm in admitting when you're wrong, or conceding when another person makes an excellent point. No harm at all.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Hey Im an idiot then too

[Slyspy]

Hey Im an idiot then too

Yes, but you are only admitting it in order to please the voters!

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Yes, but you are only admitting it in order to please the voters!

Why of course. See how honest I am

[Devastatin Dave]

Pindar...
He's not only honest, but always right and can back it up to the point where you don't dare question whats being discussed....
Bastard!!!

[LeftEyeNine]

There is a line between being honest and being stubborn. Loosening a foul mouth and insisting on what it did afterwards despite any criticism does not always meet a virtue like honesty.

[CountArach]

Hmmm, I'll throw in PanzerJager as a dark horse. Despite holding some very unpopular ideals, he speaks his mind about it constantly.

[Don Corleone]

Well, if the idea of this thread is to identify who comes out with the most bold and 'in-your-face' views, time after time, in a consistent, pervasive stream, Panzer and Dave are amateurs, pikers even. They're just cutting their milk teeth compared to my guy.

If we're looking for who comes out with the most brash, unsugarcoated, unapologetic, don't care what anyone else has to say?: Navaros, hands down.

We're all going to hell, except for that noble soul, Fred Phelps, remember?

[macsen rufus]

I vote for Louis, simply for calling the Russian president "Putain" in the Russian-threat thread

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Yes I was going to mention Nav as well. Hes sort of a holy roller version of Dave And he can really take a beating for it as well but it never deters him from sticking to his guns.

[Adrian II]

Brazil!



Oh, and the Prosimian.

[PanzerJaeger]

Don or Goofball. Lemur too.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

If we're looking for who comes out with the most brash, unsugarcoated, unapologetic, don't care what anyone else has to say?: Navaros, hands down.

The thing is are we talking about expressing their opinions honestly no matter what anyone else cares or are we talking of intellectual honesty here? I f its the latter then Indeed it would go to such as Lemur or yourself Don. Their are many others I can think of. I am another who many times just says what he thinks off the top of his head. Many a time I go back and think to myself "maybe I shoulda thunk a little more before I posted that" Is that honesty?

[Kralizec]

Well, if the idea of this thread is to identify who comes out with the most bold and 'in-your-face' views, time after time, in a consistent, pervasive stream, Panzer and Dave are amateurs, pikers even. They're just cutting their milk teeth compared to my guy.

If we're looking for who comes out with the most brash, unsugarcoated, unapologetic, don't care what anyone else has to say?: Navaros, hands down.

We're all going to hell, except for that noble soul, Fred Phelps, remember?

Uh, disagree. Nav's posts are not always consistent. I should mention that I've known him for longer then most of you here.

[Soulforged]

There is a line between being honest and being stubborn. Loosening a foul mouth and insisting on what it did afterwards despite any criticism does not always meet a virtue like honesty.

You can certainly be stubborn and honest, but I can agree with you in certain cases...

[Bijo]

How can you be certain online who's honest and who's not (excluding knowing each other personally, "in real life", etc.)?

Logically, I merely see a bunch of names, and the accounts attached to them are used by people (anyone having access to them) somewhere in the world whom I do not know. They type what they have to share and there's hardly a way to know for certain the person in question is being honest as it's difficult to ascertain whether the person's identity is true to the one we would expect.

[Lemur]

How can you be certain online who's honest and who's not (excluding knowing each other personally, "in real life", etc.)?

Logically, I merely see a bunch of names, and the accounts attached to them are used by people (anyone having access to them) somewhere in the world whom I do not know. They type what they have to share and there's hardly a way to know for certain the person in question is being honest as it's difficult to ascertain whether the person's identity is true to the one we would expect.

A couple of thoughts --

"Real life" is not exactly the perfect place to know who is honest and who deceives. Just poke around any divorce court, or any small claims court, and you'll see what I mean.

The people who post here frequently over long spans of time get to know each other, at least on some virtual ideas-only level. Don't you feel you know someone, just a little bit, when you read their book? Or an essay? Writing can be revealing, but only if you have some basic skill at it.

How does identity enter into it? Does it matter if you know that Strike is Strike? It would be pretty clear if someone got his password and started posting under his name, the change would be obvious enough. Sure, we only get to know a part of our fellow Orgahs, and some choose to be more forthright than others, but isn't that exactly the condition we live in every day? I don't know my neighbor Steve (his real name), not really. Seems like a great guy, nice family, etcetera, but for all I know he dresses up as a transvestite every Thursday night and beats baby seals.

You never know anyone fully, nor would you want to. You develop models of other people inside your noggin. If someone is inconsistent and selfish, you note it, and add it to the model. If someone is kind and generous, you note that as well. How accurate is your model? Well, how deep is your understanding of human nature? And how willing are you to be surprised by just about everyone?

It's a complicated game, and the smartest players are aware of how little they really know about their fellow men and women.

Anyway, sorry, got off on a bit of an essay there.