standing_alone inquired,
"What do you like the most about any RF member?"
I'll extend a coupla' caveats at the outset:
1) Barring a kind nudge (and provided clickable link) from an unnamed erstwhile contributor to this thread, it is unlikely that I would have encountered, much less bothered to pursue or lend further considered contribution to the topic invitingly put forward.
2) I "like" RF (or what I often refer to as "REF"), which is why I remain a monetary supporter of the forum. I respect it's primary mission statement, and it's goals in both promoting tolerance whilst providing a forum of civil discussion and debate in which to probe emotional and logical aspects of philosophical perspectives. It's a high-minded ideal of which I endorse and would wish to see broadened within an ever=growing virtual world of unbridled access and platform that readily (and undeferentially), by it's own innate nature of any lacking editorial discretion, oversight, or accountabilities) renders virtually any opinion as prospectively "legitimate", or somehow earning/worthy of deferential consideration.
3) I may "like" what REF contributors "say" (in the sense that I appreciate their lent contributions and efforts) within the broader forum, but that only speaks to my own standards of evaluative/estimable measure--not necessarily to any contributor's actually meeting or exceeding my own standards of excellence/value. I may agree with your opinion, but that does not mean that I "like" you. I may disagree with your opinion, but that does not mean I "dislike" you. I may more often "respect" a well-thought and well-structured proffered argument/opinion/rebuttal that I "dislike" or find irreconcilable difference [of opinion] within...more than some facile lent point (of which I might very well totally concur and support). Reformed religionists recently become newfound "atheists" (or non-believers") are not unlike reformed alcoholics or non-smokers...ripe for the opportunity and platform to abjectly illustrate the failures and intellectual corruption of any faith-based rationalism. In my perspective, the only thing worse than some "born-again" evangelical or religious "convert" is the "reborn hard"--ex-smoker, ex-drinker, ex-drug abuser, ex-married, ex-whatever--crusader bound by conscience (and/or some variant of a 12 step program) to reform everyone that surrounds them..."for their own good".
Spare me your testimonies.
Please. I'm almost 50 years old.
I've heard them ALL.
MANY times over.
4) I don't post here often. REF is a modest hobby/interest of mine. It's not my life, my driving/primary interest, or my lone social networking opportunity to meet interesting, exciting, or especially articulate/interesting people. I concede my good fortune to know such people of estimable good character and nature "in person", and they consume my time and interests much more frequently (and satisfactorily) than the very best virtual encounters that REF affords at any time. Call it the validation of the visceral, the tactile, the real.
Ideas and merited opinions in the virtual realm must stand on their own, for they are utterly devoid of any tactile/visceral sense of body language, environment, eye contact, or occasional (and completely accidental) contextual interactions concerning alluring female boobage on display in a tight sweater (after all, proper decorum in all situations is a must).
5) I would generally echo the observations lent within this thread from the (now banned) poster that suggested that this thread serves primarily as an overtly opportunistic venue of self-validation and mutual back-slapping approvals, solidifying "clique-ish" ties and affiliations of wanton mutual appreciation/supplication of shared interests/attentions.
Inasmuch, I would claim no sense of grand omnipotence or experience in either validating or dismissing the earnest plaudits generously lent to the most conspicuous and frequent contributing members to REF. Of the many of such thusly acknowledged within this thread, I can not honestly claim to have extensively encountered in discussion/debate; though by reiterated and generously lent praise alone, I could say that I would welcome the opportunity.
6) With an average of (approximately) 0.9 posts per day of membership in REF, I could hardly be regarded as either a prolific, or especially notable member/contributor within the overall community-at-large.
OK...now that the most appropriate and immediate caveats have been addressed, I'll attempt most sincere answer to the OP, with one last caveat....
...all of my following favorable estimations of named members I have either:
1) Directly exchanged discourse within a topical forum;
2) Been the recipient of, or donor towards, lent acknowledging frubals, or;
3) Been a removed yet silent and anonymous admirer from afar...
In no preferential order nor editorial punctuation...I tender my "
Most Favored Poster Status" to...
Pah - for his unerring and virtually paternal capacities/qualities in service to, and insistence upon both reason and fact in debatable argument . Wisdom personified.
Sunstone - for originality and imagination in instigating topics of discussion (albeit not necessarily) worthy of heated or emotional debate. Added kudos for being a stand-up kinda mod.
Robtex - for evaluative objectivity and discerning character.
cardero (Mr.) - for his articulate, inspired, and tenacious defense of what he believes *could* be true...;-)
michel - for his generous spirit, good nature, and rare capacity for contemplative reevaluation of presented contestable viewpoints. A man of which, I would add, I would enjoy the company of downing a few pints of better (or bitter) ale whenever circumstance and convenient teleportation would allow...
mr guy -aka, "crapsack". Need I say more? Too funny to be rationally defended, yet priceless.
Flappycat - just because..
NetDoc- for his expertise in the skills of evasion and deflection in the face of pointed inquiry. There is no one
more proficient (in all of REF) in this most practiced art form that I have encountered that rivals NetDoc.
I admire skilled tenacity...even when it entails running away to fight another day. ;-)
Mr Spinkles - funny, smart, concise. If only I could be one of those three qualities...
Quoth_The _Raven - for her evinced insight, perception, benevolent nature...and not rubbing her superior intellect all over my face (and for being a fellow Dog).
SoliDeoGloria - for tenacity, scope of vision, intelligence, patience, and patience (did I say that last one twice? Hmmmm....).
Buttons - because you frubaled me for this post:
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/showthread.php?p=358469#post358469
beckysoup61 - for her tenacious defense of her faith despite overwhelming naivete.
dan- for trying...
linwood - for being solid and real....
MdmSzdWhtGuy - succinct, concise, brief, and absolutely withering in application of fact/logic.
Buttercup - unabashedly female, quick, generous, and smarter than anyone dares suspect.
Feathers_in_Hair - may very well be the most gentle human spirit I have ever encountered IRL or within this realm of virtually faceless ambiguity. If I had a daughter, I'd want her to be like her...
PureX - for painfully astute and unassailable logic, presented in a most most compelling and straightforward fashion.
sojourner - for his temperate perspective...
lilithu - for tenacity of position, in spite of overwhelming evidence presented as contrast or invalidation of any substantive support of that position...
angellous_evangellous - for trying...
YmirGF, CaptainXeroid, and Mister_T - for being generous fans...
I confess that I have not mentioned all members that have generously lent positive encouragement to my contributions, or all of those I have tendered similar endorsement. To these folks I simply say "thank you" for making my visits to REF worthwhle...
Thanks for the great conversations.
