Does a post suck if it doesn't get any responses?

[Jara sang]

Like this one... watch it sink.

[asthmaticeog]

1. No.

If a post gets no responses, it's the DUer that sucks. :evilgrin:

[Jara sang]

17. Ba dum bump SPLASH!

[progmom]

2. nope

it just doesn't make a sound when it falls in a forest.

[ScreamingMeemie]

3. But the squirrel it hits will scream...

;) :hi:

[WI_DEM]

4. not necessarily

I've seen lots of threads that had something really important to say or were amusing sink. Occassionally some threads that sink do deserve to. But then I've seen lots of threads that have nothing really interesting to say or even particularly funny get many responses. So who knows why?

[gordianot]

5. Been there done that.

The junky ones caught fire and the one that I found could be life changing died. Want to read some of mine? Just kidding.

[Kurovski]

6. No, it just means that

it is a communication so pristine, so complete, that nothing need be added.

[Debi]

7. If you'd quit trying to scam people on your posts they'd respond more

Stop asking for money....nobody's gonna give you any :mad:

[last_texas_dem]

8. No

That means most of my posts suck, and that just couldn't be true...

[antigone382]

9. No, it means that nobody else is good enough to reply to you.

Or at least that's what I've decided.

[MadAsHellNewYorker]

10. none of my posts usually get responses

so the answer is yes... :cry:

[gordianot]

11. A response.

:hi: :kick:

Barry said that? I used to demonize him as the arch foe conservative the more I read the more he surprises me on his many positions. A person I respected and almost worshiped Robert Heinlein was a strong Barry supporter and I argued with him (with much deference) once about that many years ago. Thanks.

[MadAsHellNewYorker]

13. yaaaaaa

:woohoo:

:hi: how you doing gordianot

[MadAsHellNewYorker]

15. Barry did say that

in the ADVOCATE too! Although he was a bit trigger happy for the nucular weapons, he was spot on about social policies. His wife even strated the first planned parenthood in Arizona. I mean this guys was a "real" conservative. He would in no way be associated with todays "repukes."

Its really scary when Goldwaters social policies make perfect sense.

check out this thread for some great Goldwater stuff:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=1556335

[gordianot]

16. To think I argued (mildly) with one of his staunches supporters.

Robert Heinlein and his brother, about Goldwater's racism and intolerance. They denied he was intolerant or racist, code word in those days for Social Conservative. Over the years I have seen the error of my youthful judgment.

Some might call Heinlein a neo conservative today but this was a really complex person who definitely was a divergent thinker. The General argued that I was too young (15 almost 16) to read his new novels with sexual themes. Not Robert Heinlein who was years ahead of his time. His support of Goldwater makes more sense to me now.

By 1968 they had a lot of good things to say about Bobby Kennedy, but was never really sure where they stood on that sad year and election.

I learned something new, Thanks

[DS1]

12. No, some of mine sum everything up so well, there's simply nothing

to add. :-)

[El Fuego]

14. Sometimes a post is good ...

But you just can't think of anything to say! :shrug: