I found KarmaGoddess' post to be very well written and full of good points. In fact, it was good, long, and actually about what this thread is. If this website had some kind of "Best Post" thing, I'd vote for her, because she said it very well. And it was not a waste of time at all. If it is, so are your posts, Brainman. She never bashed Courtney, by the way. Bashing would be if she said "Courtney sux!" or something, which she didn't.

I'm confused as to how you, Brainman, think KarmaGoddess was off-topic, when this thread is about Courtney and Duncan picking on Harold. That is what most of her post was about, and it mad valid sense and point.

Because it wasn't. It was about Courtney being a villain. Courtney being ruthless, Courtney being unethical, Courtney being immoral. Courtney does't behave to the ethics of society. That has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not Harold deserves to be picked on.

She touches on that once when she says that two wrongs do not make a right. Of course, she contradicts herself immediately by stating she'll cut Courtney slack for assaulting Harold with a lamppost because of his cheating. She then states that to further this is petty and vindictive.

However, Courtney doesn't do that. She has never taken revenge on Harold after crushing him with the lamppost. This critical point is not addressed. Ever.So it response to whether Courtney deserves to pick on Harold, she has no argument that she even did so.

She then states that Courtney deserved to come back: Irrelevant.

She says there is no moral justification for Duncan bullying Harold because he's a bully to begin with. This addresses nothing.

Then she states Courtney moaned at Lindsay's victory during the challenge: Irrelevant

Then she attacks me. Then she says Courtney had no right to not use her grapple gun to save the contestants: Irrelevant and stupid.

Then she says Courtney has no common decency and attacks me again: Irrevelant.

She states I refuse to discuss Courtney's morals and attacks me again: Irrevelant.

She says that Harold has some morality: Irrelevant

She says that being unhgenic doesn't make Harold unethical: Irrevelant.

Then she spends her last paragraph attacking me.

How, exactly, does this qualify for best post when over 80% of what she says is irrelevant, and she attacks me during most of the rest. You are letting the post's length, and the fact that it validates your beliefs, override the fact that, quite frankly, it's the quintenssial definition of a troll. Call me what you will; I'm at least putting Courtney has the right to take revenge on him in all my posts, and only address who is superior when it is asked.

This is why her post was just an eloquent waste of time. Like the Declaration of Independence, it was just an eloquent middle finger.

She did bash Courtney; anyone can look at the post and say that. She calls her immoral and unethical, and spends her entire post doing so. That's bashing, particularly because she is using her own arbitrary rules, skewed heavily towards Harold, to judge Courtney.

You state that this game is about how you treat your fellow competitors, but it's not. Neither this argument, nor TDI/A in general, is about that. It's a cartoon that uses such shock humor for it's comedy.

Anyone else see the double standered that places KarmaGoddess as a troll for bashing Courtney, yet Courtney fans do the very same thing to Harold?

I like a good debate as much as the next person, but this is one of the only debates I've been in that actually got me upset at times. Mainly due to somes' lack of respect for other peoples' opinions.