I believe that opinions should vary and decorum prevail as much as possible in order to form a more perfect union...short of that, arguments should at least be funny and contain as little facts and figures as possible...

Stand up and declare you right to voice conservative arguments without being told! 

Your intent is clear.  Quite.  That doesn't mean I happen to agree with your characterization ( "attacked for being a voice of conservatives here") of her words.  I've been on the receiving end of many barbs or attacks — and plenty of them having nothing at all to do with my politics, whatever they are. 

I submit that some persons here attack others, and often, because there are no appreciable consequences for their behaviour.   Until that is resolved, the "negatives imposed by a few" will reappear with regularity to ensure that disharmony takes place, if not the outright anarchy desired by some.

Your intent is clear.  Quite.  That doesn't mean I happen to agree with your characterization ( "attacked for being a voice of conservatives here") of her words.  I've been on the receiving end of many barbs or attacks — and plenty of them having nothing at all to do with my politics, whatever they are. 

I submit that some persons here attack others, and often, because there are no appreciable consequences for their behaviour.   Until that is resolved, the "negatives imposed by a few" will reappear with regularity to ensure that disharmony takes place, if not the outright anarchy desired by some.

We would give up all the gains from the diversity of views here because of the negatives imposed by a few.  That would be the gist of it. There are those who have long argued/proclaimed/indicated that political subjects should not be discussed here because the negative aspects of it overhwhelm any positives. Perhaps they are right.  My view has differed, but I am losing ground and reconsidering .  

Edit: As for the part of your post about extrapolation, I would say I summarized, based on memory. What she said, to which I had responded, was: "Thankfully, the Beak is resilient enough to withstand the barbs cast his way. He is one of the few vocal conservatives at RP."  I used the word "attacks."  One of the definitions of "barb" is "a biting or pointedly critical remark or comment."  Anyway, semantics aside, I think my intent was/is clear.   

I happen to agree with your commentary above.  Though, could you clarify the baby and bath water statement?  It leaves much to interpretation.

Ummm.  Why are you seeking to reconcile my words with the impressions of Zip?  Are we not two separate individuals with our own ideas and thoughts? And why does this innate minutia matter to you?  Surely there's something a little more meaningful you might wish to offer an opinion or commentary on...

 steeler wrote:
Your interpretation of what I meant is incorrect.  This has already been explained to you before in a post meant to specifically clarify your understanding and that of anyone else. 

My clarification, which you quoted, specifically states "On the whole, my weighting probably leans somewhat conservative. "  Why are you now choosing to ignore my offered clarification?

No one that I know of is 100 percent conservative, liberal, or anything else.  If the point he was making is that people wrongly assume he is 100 percent conservative, well, I would agree with him that they would be mistaken.   

I took his last post, and one sometime before that, as meaning that he sees himself as being neither conservative nor liberal. That self-assessment would seem to be at odds with your prior statement that he is one of the few voices of the conservative viewpoint here.       

"A voice of" doesn't translate to 100% pure. Are you 100% liberal?

Zipper sees you as a voice of conservatives here on this forum. She would not appear to be your opponent nor your enemy.

 To clarify, I hold viewpoints that would be described as liberal on some topics.  Quite liberal.  On other topics, my views would be seen as conservative.  Can't say that I have any views that any would consider far-right, or far-left, though not everyone operates their political compass from the same centre.  On the whole, my weighting probably leans somewhat conservative.  In America, I'd most likely be identified as an Independent voter. 

In Canada, I've voted repeatedly for both Liberal and Conservative candidates.  Issues matter - I am anything but a party-line voter.  Certainly no one here knows the full range of my beliefs, as the list of serious topics discussed here that I have participated in on the forum are very few.  Many people here have made the error of believing I am 100% conservative or even far right, while failing to grasp the range of topics that never or rarely appear on the forum, where my participation therein would indicate leanings in the opposite direction.  People see what they wish to see in their opponents/enemies.  It's easier than facing the truth, I suppose.

///

And anarchy?  Perhaps you missed the posting guidelines on  the front page of the forum.  Doesn't look like the stated intention is anarchy to me. 

Sweet!  Beak started that LeftWingNutz thread - post stuff - I'll read it!

I read a coupla' fistfuls of nutroots nooz every day that I could cheerfully share here.

Well, just kicking a little dirt, really - I am serious about the idea of necessity and the RP threads being pure anarchy - it's what I love best about RP - well, almost as much as you.