The value you place on "who" says it:

Be honest here.

I've found by visiting many discussion boards that a lot of people tend to agree or disagree with the post itself -- by who says it.

SO. If you see a post you tend to agree with, but it's made by a person you normally don't like, are you less likely to give it any value?

On the other hand, if you see a post you tend to disagree with, yet it's made by someone you look up to and respect, you might be less likely to disagree?

Does that make sense? Do you tone down your objections if it's someone you like, or tone down your agreement, if it's someone you don't like?

Myself, I never read "who" made the post until after I've read it. But even if it's someone who normally irks me, I will still agree with their point. and vice versa.

So do you form your opinions and posts by "who" made the comment or not?

Be honest with yourself.

Yeah I laugh at stupid threads created by people who I dont like... if that makes sense?

I keep away from threads like, 'stupid men', or 'abortion', or 'damn stupid men'

meh

Or Lol at the seriousness of suicide victims threads?

I'm open to all discussion, it's why I do my music and It's why I join these forums; to help people out with questions, etc. But then again that's just because I've been thru a lot and overcome a lot and people need more help than I do. I see what ya saying tho, If I dont like someone I'll probably lean towards disagreeing before agreeing wit em on anything.

I speak my mind always on any subject, whether I like the person or not; though I may tread a little softer with those I like.

Lighten up you take this stuff too too serious. Remember this forum kills boredom and it's so humorous.

you know me already

Bingo. We got one person able to speak the truth.

Now I know some people like me, and some people don't. But I can guarantee that if I say something that I know the people who don't like me would totally agree with (if someone else had posted it) -- I can bet money they will STILL find a point to disagree with.

It's just funny that way.

How hard is it to remain impartial, and just read the words without regard to "who" said it?

If it's an interesting Thread,I'll join in,my pet hate is when somebody asksthe most stupid questions,something like ,I just ate rat poison and I feel sick" What do I do Now" the amount of times I felt like being openly rude to them is ridiculous.

I spoke the truth, word for word.

Well, the person posting shouldn't be used as a bias. However, the person posting, once you get a sense of who they are, is within the context of the post. Your characterization of an individual should not affect the credibility of the words, but does affect the credibility of the person. Let me use an example to clarify.

Example: TFS Member X
Thread #1- Candidate A has an impeccable
record in the legislature, and so
deserves reelection.

Thread #2- Candidate A is the white guy for the
job.

Two very different statements, aren't they? Hopefully, no one would give any credence to the second statement. But regardless of the source, the first statement could be argued to a convincing measure of certainty. The fictitious Member X is a s*** individual, and has no credibility. But words are words, read and understood universally, regardless of origin. Fortunately we have the sense to know what's stupid and what's not. It's simply a funny contradiction that it's possible for a stupid person to say a smart thing.

I post whatever I am in the mood to post.

Although emorics Josie posts make me want to pull a Mike Tyson on his ear.

ahh, please do

I'd hate to think people were taking it easy on me because they like me. That'd mean I was liked!