Language and Propaganda - an example

@maporsche,

maporsche wrote:

I'd rather have users put others on ignore and use the thumbs down button on this forum than have us all sit here and try to make up some offensive names to call other posters you disagree with.

Wouldn't you?

Uhhh, no, not me. Only a candy-ass cheese-eater would "vote" on a thread. It might be one of the most cheese-eatiniest aspects of this here joint. Ya got an opinon? Then say it. You disagree with someone? Then say so, and say why. Only a coward would demand anonymity when "confronting" a person or their opinion, and only a fool would think they have said or done something meaningful by "voting down" a post.

Call me anything damn thing you want. I will never "complain" to the admins about it, no matter how vile, profane, "unfair," or (gasp) "offensive" it might be. I might confront YOU about it, though. But it wouldn't be because you "hurt my precious feelings." I'm not that weak, sorry, cheese-eater.

2 Replies

@layman,

Now he went and added "candy-ass" to "cheese eaters" ! : Laughing

Has layman no shame at all ?

0 Replies

@georgeob1,

georgeob1 wrote:

maporsche wrote:

That being said, I'd rather have users put others on ignore and use the thumbs down button on this forum than have us all sit here and try to make up some offensive names to call other posters you disagree with.

Wouldn't you?

I'm not so sure. I take real interest and satisfaction from the sometimes vigorous debates that occur here. I truly enjoy the give and take. I have learned from long experience to listen to those who disagree with me: it can occasionally expose my own ignorance or misunderstanding of issues. Even Blatham makes me rethink things and sometimes let go of half-thought out conclusions and mere prejudicial assumptions. I certainly don't tell him that because it might induce him into greater error.

Old Navy saying .. ' If you're headed for a cliff, the guy who tells you you're ******* up isn't necessarily your enemy, and the guy who keeps his mouth shut isn't really your friend'.

Finally I think there's something unseemly about the pervasive group think and anonomyous thumbing down of posts here. I generally ignore it, but I wouldn't encourage more of it.

I didn't say that I didn't like vigorous debates. I said I don't prefer the 'creative' insults. You can have one without the other. In fact, you're more likely to have the debates we all benefit from if we discourage the personal animosity instead of perpetuating it.

In your example... 'If you're headed for a cliff, the guy who tells you your a candy-ass-cheese-eater is not being helpful'

0 Replies

@layman,

I just want to personally thank you for all that you've been adding to the quality of debates on A2K.

I'd like to remind you that you're behaving the same way as the people you're complaining about (a bit more offensively though).

2 Replies

@maporsche,

Good fror you ! Frankly I do that too sometimes.

0 Replies

@maporsche,

maporsche wrote:

I just want to personally thank you

You're welcome!

Cheese-eater.

0 Replies

@georgeob1,

Quote:

I don't have anyone on Ignore, though there are many here who disagree with me on numerous issues.

Fine, your choice of course. And though not absolutely true, my experience demonstrates that those who don't put some others on ignore are out for a fight. It's their reason for engagement. I'm not interested in that game. Disagreement isn't the point. Style and intent is.

2 Replies

@blatham,

blatham wrote:

[ Disagreement isn't the point. Style and intent is.

I believe the substance of the discussion is the important thing. Style is nice and intent doesn't count for much. Indeed, I have learned to dread those who wish to be judged on the merit of their intentions, as opposed to the results they actually achieve. However that does seem to be the going in assumption of most progressives in our politics.

Intentions are elusive too. They can't be verified or even known with certainty. Results can be observed.

2 Replies

I admit a bias in that in a compilation of my life's opinion forming, I come out on the side of Blatham. But, I still listen.

The difference? I see the rather liked, even by me somewhat, admiral, being forgiven for being snide about others in almost every post. Tacky, if smart sounding, but distraction from issues. Blatham rarely does that, if he does.

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

georgeob1 wrote:

Indeed, I have learned to dread those who wish to be judged on the merit of their intentions, as opposed to the results they actually achieve.

You too, eh? It's dreadful, sho nuff. But dont never, NEVER, I SAY, try tellin no cheese-eater that.

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

Quote:

Style is nice and intent doesn't count for much.

They are the two key identifiers of a troll. They are both readily discernible after a short while if not quite immediately. Substantive discussions do not proceed from such posts/posters or do so rarely because that isn't the game being played. So after giving such a poster a chance or three, I cease bothering.

1 Reply

@blatham,

What is a "troll" exactly, anyway? Anybody know?

1 Reply

@ossobucotemp,

Well you caused me to look up the precise definition of "snide".

I got "derogatory or mocking in an indirect way". I'll confess to that. My intent is to be clear and emphatic, but I'll agree that doesn't justify the fault.

The "admiral" thing was a long time ago - back when "tacky" was a common word. I don't think I'm tacky- a bit overbearing and aggressive I'll accept, but not tacky. I would like to think I am more than just smart-sounding, but I'll leave that to you.

Blatham is very pointed in accusing those he opposes politically of nefarious conspiracies and really bad intentions. I think that's wrong both in substance and in his implicit assessment of human nature. I have learned that people are often stupid, subject to the embrace of convenient illusions, and in the grip of very bad or poorly conceived ideas, but only rarely truly evil.

1 Reply

@layman,

Tell us how successful you are before we buy the bull, and define success in the meantime.

You are hard to figure. You may be a white dj from New Jersey or Texas or godhelpus from California. I take you as working it here. You may be black or hate 'them', or even be black and also hate them.

1 Reply

@layman,

layman wrote:

What is a "troll" exactly, anyway? Anybody know?

Wikipedia - Internet Troll wrote:

In Internet slang, a troll (/ˈtroʊl/, /ˈtrɒl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal, on-topic discussion, often for the troll's amusement.

A pretty recent example of 'trolling' behavior (someone starting arguments or upsetting people by posting inflammatory messages with the intent of provoking readers into an emotional response) can be found here:
http://able2know.org/topic/354870-1

3 Replies

@georgeob1,

I don't mind the arguments, it's snide from any side that zings my hippopotamas.

Not that I am sans fault, egads.

0 Replies

@maporsche,

I think trolls are figures in Norwegian folklore. I recall a childhood story about the troll who lived under a bridge and wouldn't let anyone cross.

Lots of bridges and trolls in Norway. In the old days we used Norwegian airfields in Bergen, Trondheim,. Bodo, and Andoya as divert fields during North Atlantic carrier operations, and had a few overnight visits in bad weather days. The Norwegians Air Force guys came in two polar types: we called them Christians and Vikings. I liked the Vikings better but learned not to drink with them.

0 Replies

@ossobucotemp,

ossobucotemp wrote:

Tell us how successful you are before we buy the bull, and define success in the meantime.

You are hard to figure. You may be a white dj from New Jersey or Texas or godhelpus from California. I take you as working it here. You may be black or hate 'them', or even be black and also hate them.

I think that's a bit over the top, even tacky. I note the abrupt, premptory, authoritarian demand for more information (very Blatham-like), and the strange interest in just who/what your interlocutor "is" . All we know about anyone here is what they write (except in the few cases in which posters have met). Your interest in characterizing another poster is, at best, patronizing.

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

I get giving him room.

I talked early with him in pms at length. I feel like a ******* fool for being positive.

1 Reply

@maporsche,

maporsche wrote:

Wikipedia - Internet Troll wrote:

In Internet slang, a troll (/ˈtroʊl/, /ˈtrɒl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal, on-topic discussion, often for the troll's amusement.

A pretty recent example of 'trolling' behavior (someone starting arguments or upsetting people by posting inflammatory messages with the intent of provoking readers into an emotional response) can be found here:
http://able2know.org/topic/354870-1

Have you even read that thread you cited? There's a lot of philosophical discussion in it that might interest some people.

This definition of "troll" is quite compounded and ambiguous. Is "starting an argument" (which seems to be what most every thread here is designed to do) being a "troll?" Or are you only a troll if some cheese-eater claims to be "upset?" Is this some kind of popularity contest, that it?

What is "normal discussion" and how is it "disrupted?"

1 Reply

Language and Propaganda - an example

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know