On October 15 2019 16:42 StarStruck wrote: Lebron stupid James and now this?
The amount of hypocrisy the NBA and now Blizzard is spewing out is sad. Thank God I stopped playing Blizzard games.
It's a shame so few will actually rise up and in other regions that they'll be patting themselves on the back for appeasing to China's bullshit. This is what happens when a communist nation gets too big.
At least one republican is calling out Lebron
Him and Senator Ted Cruz were in Hong Kong a couple days ago. The US will pass Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act eventually. Right now Trump is turning a blind eye to this because of the trade talks with the mainland.
We are at a point in global economy, where the worst thing for china would be, that the west would suddenly decide to "Bern it up" and taste some of that communism.
On October 15 2019 11:42 zenist wrote: Regarding HK protest, it has been proven that many Chinese police have disguised themselves as protesters to conduct violence.
Regardless of violence though, you can't blame HKers for protesting because carrie lam (controlled by the communist party) made stupid move of barring masks. The movement was dying down after completely getting rid of the extradition bill.
Again, I em a hker and many of our hkers are blaming these riots. We are not like your outsiders, we live here. Like I said before, it is not the matter that their appeal is right or wrong, it is the matter that they are destroying the city, destroying other people’s life.
If you think to pursue a good purpose, we can make use of bad methods, the terrorists may not be always wrong?
Polls are showing that 80% HKers support the protesters.
So I think you are hanging out with the minorities here.
So it’s been interesting to see some of the Chinese troll posts in this thread, but my concern is that I don’t think the claim that they’re trolls is falsifiable (which in turn means it’s ineffective). We have two options...
1) A Chinese lurker-turned-poster who can read English but not write it comfortably, deciding to create an account to weigh in on a meaningful/personal topic of discussion.
2) A government paid commenter with an ulterior motive to sway the conversation.
How do we actually tell the difference between these two? They're both low-post, not-so-great English, and pro-China/anti-protest.
My take: it doesn’t matter if they’re 1 or 2, you either debate their arguments and sources based on their own merits (like some have been doing in this thread), or you ignore them and move on if you’re not interested in the discussion. Accusing someone of being a paid troll when you have no way of telling the difference between 1 and 2 just makes you seem like an ad-hominem spewing asshole who doesn’t really give a shit that 1 could exist.
On October 15 2019 22:32 Ryzel wrote: So it’s been interesting to see some of the Chinese troll posts in this thread, but my concern is that I don’t think the claim that they’re trolls is falsifiable (which in turn means it’s ineffective). We have two options...
1) A Chinese lurker-turned-poster who can read English but not write it comfortably, deciding to create an account to weigh in on a meaningful/personal topic of discussion.
2) A government paid commenter with an ulterior motive to sway the conversation.
How do we actually tell the difference between these two? They're both low-post, not-so-great English, and pro-China/anti-protest.
My take: it doesn’t matter if they’re 1 or 2, you either debate their arguments and sources based on their own merits (like some have been doing in this thread), or you ignore them and move on if you’re not interested in the discussion. Accusing someone of being a paid troll when you have no way of telling the difference between 1 and 2 just makes you seem like an ad-hominem spewing asshole who doesn’t really give a shit that 1 could exist.
Problem with trying to debate with them is that they will never discuss with you in an honest fashion. They lie when it suits them, ignores points against them, jumps from user to user whenever there is a sliver of anything they can blow up on, and largely just end up derailing the thread. Like, there's someone in this thread who is seriously trying to convince us he's from HK, and simultaneously have the guts to pretend most of HK doesn't support this movement, while whining about how he can't find any open restaurants. How to you even begin to take that at face value?
The problem with ignoring them is that they continue to post bullshit, and end up derailing the thread anyways.
On October 15 2019 22:32 Ryzel wrote: So it’s been interesting to see some of the Chinese troll posts in this thread, but my concern is that I don’t think the claim that they’re trolls is falsifiable (which in turn means it’s ineffective). We have two options...
1) A Chinese lurker-turned-poster who can read English but not write it comfortably, deciding to create an account to weigh in on a meaningful/personal topic of discussion.
2) A government paid commenter with an ulterior motive to sway the conversation.
How do we actually tell the difference between these two? They're both low-post, not-so-great English, and pro-China/anti-protest.
My take: it doesn’t matter if they’re 1 or 2, you either debate their arguments and sources based on their own merits (like some have been doing in this thread), or you ignore them and move on if you’re not interested in the discussion. Accusing someone of being a paid troll when you have no way of telling the difference between 1 and 2 just makes you seem like an ad-hominem spewing asshole who doesn’t really give a shit that 1 could exist.
Problem with trying to debate with them is that they will never discuss with you in an honest fashion. They lie when it suits them, ignores points against them, jumps from user to user whenever there is a sliver of anything they can blow up on, and largely just end up derailing the thread. Like, there's someone in this thread who is seriously trying to convince us he's from HK, and simultaneously have the guts to pretend most of HK doesn't support this movement, while whining about how he can't find any open restaurants. How to you even begin to take that at face value?
The problem with ignoring them is that they continue to post bullshit, and end up derailing the thread anyways.
I get the frustration, but again your response should simply be to call out the lies by showing proof of your claims (like CorsairHero and others are doing), or ignoring him completely in-thread while reporting a potential issue to the mod team (which it looks like you’ve done).
As an example, can you conceive of anything this poster could do to prove to you that he’s from HK and not paid by the government? If you can’t, then some part of your logic somewhere is invalid and should be examined, because you’re incorrectly rejecting the possibility that he is 1 and not 2.
Blizzard is now paying for all their silly, nit-picky "community management" decisions. It is supposed to be a bad idea to micromanage your employees. Well Blizzard got sucked into micromanaging its customers by a gang of weirdo trolls with their green frogs and OK hand signs. What a huge over reaction by the thin skinned grievance squad at Blizzard. Now they're paying for it. Who are the adults and who are the children here? It is hard to tell.
Newton's 3rd Law of Physics is happening right before us.
On October 15 2019 22:32 Ryzel wrote: So it’s been interesting to see some of the Chinese troll posts in this thread, but my concern is that I don’t think the claim that they’re trolls is falsifiable (which in turn means it’s ineffective). We have two options...
1) A Chinese lurker-turned-poster who can read English but not write it comfortably, deciding to create an account to weigh in on a meaningful/personal topic of discussion.
2) A government paid commenter with an ulterior motive to sway the conversation.
How do we actually tell the difference between these two? They're both low-post, not-so-great English, and pro-China/anti-protest.
My take: it doesn’t matter if they’re 1 or 2, you either debate their arguments and sources based on their own merits (like some have been doing in this thread), or you ignore them and move on if you’re not interested in the discussion. Accusing someone of being a paid troll when you have no way of telling the difference between 1 and 2 just makes you seem like an ad-hominem spewing asshole who doesn’t really give a shit that 1 could exist.
Problem with trying to debate with them is that they will never discuss with you in an honest fashion. They lie when it suits them, ignores points against them, jumps from user to user whenever there is a sliver of anything they can blow up on, and largely just end up derailing the thread. Like, there's someone in this thread who is seriously trying to convince us he's from HK, and simultaneously have the guts to pretend most of HK doesn't support this movement, while whining about how he can't find any open restaurants. How to you even begin to take that at face value?
The problem with ignoring them is that they continue to post bullshit, and end up derailing the thread anyways.
I get the frustration, but again your response should simply be to call out the lies by showing proof of your claims (like CorsairHero and others are doing), or ignoring him completely in-thread while reporting a potential issue to the mod team (which it looks like you’ve done).
As an example, can you conceive of anything this poster could do to prove to you that he’s from HK and not paid by the government? If you can’t, then some part of your logic somewhere is invalid and should be examined, because you’re incorrectly rejecting the possibility that he is 1 and not 2.
I don't necessarily refuse to believe that he's from HK, just if he is from HK as he claims, then it is extremely weird that he lives in such a bubble where he believes people aren't supporting it, despite hundreds of thousands to millions of people on the streets every day. It does cast a large shadow over his claim, but even if it happens to be true, it kinda just makes his whole position worse. In any case it is clear he is not arguing in good faith.
Unless I am confusing him with someone else, he has claimed that he couldn't find a restaurant open during the protests, which is a somewhat absurd claim. This being parts of a city where there is a restaurant every 20 meters, in the area and surrounding areas where the protests are occuring, possibly more if you count the restaurants that aren't on ground level. Where do you think the protestors eat? They just go home hungry? How many protesters are there? If they are as few as he claims, he shouldn't have any difficulty walking to a restaurant.
Of course if anybody ask, I am not from Hong Kong, but I have relatives there and I've visited there many times in the past, and it strikes me as a ridiculous claim to make. It'll be like claiming you can't find anywhere to eat in the centre of a densely populated city like Tokyo or Seoul or even lesser densely populated cities just because of a few protestors. It'll be like to claim that because there are protests in London, I can't find a restaurant to eat. It's not really a thing unless the protests are spread across to a significant part of the city, in which case its a pretty damn big protest since in Hong Kong's case all the protesters must originate from Hong Kong itself. The protests can't be both small and stop you from walking for 10 minutes to find a restaurant. It's not something that makes sense to people that live in a bigcity. It just sounds like something someone who never lived in a densely populated city would write. Anyways, he could very well be from HK, but he is being deceitful to both say that protests are small and at the same time cannot find a restaurant open in the area in a reasonable amout of time.
Watching the shitstorm unfold, I have to put the popcorn down for a sec and ask again my previous question: what's Blizzard's marketing and community management budget? Probably in the tens of millions, right? Probably outsourced to some massive marketing and social media firm, right? All these analysts getting paid 6 figure salaries couldn't foresee what every neckbeard who wanks it to Dva futa porn could?
On October 15 2019 23:55 ihatevideogames wrote: Watching the shitstorm unfold, I have to put the popcorn down for a sec and ask again my previous question: what's Blizzard's marketing and community management budget? Probably in the tens of millions, right? Probably outsourced to some massive marketing and social media firm, right? All these analysts getting paid 6 figure salaries couldn't foresee what every neckbeard who wanks it to Dva futa porn could?
The PR department wasn't asked what the public impact of the ban would be because they were to busy trying to find out how to best avoid getting banned in China. The PR department didn't draft Brack's response because China did.
I wouldn't blame the PR department when they were probably never listened to in this.
On October 15 2019 22:32 Ryzel wrote: So it’s been interesting to see some of the Chinese troll posts in this thread, but my concern is that I don’t think the claim that they’re trolls is falsifiable (which in turn means it’s ineffective). We have two options...
1) A Chinese lurker-turned-poster who can read English but not write it comfortably, deciding to create an account to weigh in on a meaningful/personal topic of discussion.
2) A government paid commenter with an ulterior motive to sway the conversation.
How do we actually tell the difference between these two? They're both low-post, not-so-great English, and pro-China/anti-protest.
My take: it doesn’t matter if they’re 1 or 2, you either debate their arguments and sources based on their own merits (like some have been doing in this thread), or you ignore them and move on if you’re not interested in the discussion. Accusing someone of being a paid troll when you have no way of telling the difference between 1 and 2 just makes you seem like an ad-hominem spewing asshole who doesn’t really give a shit that 1 could exist.
Problem with trying to debate with them is that they will never discuss with you in an honest fashion. They lie when it suits them, ignores points against them, jumps from user to user whenever there is a sliver of anything they can blow up on, and largely just end up derailing the thread. Like, there's someone in this thread who is seriously trying to convince us he's from HK, and simultaneously have the guts to pretend most of HK doesn't support this movement, while whining about how he can't find any open restaurants. How to you even begin to take that at face value?
The problem with ignoring them is that they continue to post bullshit, and end up derailing the thread anyways.
I get the frustration, but again your response should simply be to call out the lies by showing proof of your claims (like CorsairHero and others are doing), or ignoring him completely in-thread while reporting a potential issue to the mod team (which it looks like you’ve done).
As an example, can you conceive of anything this poster could do to prove to you that he’s from HK and not paid by the government? If you can’t, then some part of your logic somewhere is invalid and should be examined, because you’re incorrectly rejecting the possibility that he is 1 and not 2.
I don't necessarily refuse to believe that he's from HK, just if he is from HK as he claims, then it is extremely weird that he lives in such a bubble where he believes people aren't supporting it, despite hundreds of thousands to millions of people on the streets every day. It does cast a large shadow over his claim, but even if it happens to be true, it kinda just makes his whole position worse. In any case it is clear he is not arguing in good faith.
I worry for the day when the paid trolls get a bit more sophisticated and subtle. Nobody fucking buys it when a bu ch of low post users appear and are antagonistic to such a degree from the start. Preposterous false equivalences like ‘the entire Western media is all wrong and brainwashing you, not our media though.’
On the other hand I believe we’ve seen honest interlocutors amongst our Chinese brethren in this thread too, the difference between how they post is VERY apparent and has little to do with grasp of the language.
On October 15 2019 22:32 Ryzel wrote: So it’s been interesting to see some of the Chinese troll posts in this thread, but my concern is that I don’t think the claim that they’re trolls is falsifiable (which in turn means it’s ineffective). We have two options...
1) A Chinese lurker-turned-poster who can read English but not write it comfortably, deciding to create an account to weigh in on a meaningful/personal topic of discussion.
2) A government paid commenter with an ulterior motive to sway the conversation.
How do we actually tell the difference between these two? They're both low-post, not-so-great English, and pro-China/anti-protest.
My take: it doesn’t matter if they’re 1 or 2, you either debate their arguments and sources based on their own merits (like some have been doing in this thread), or you ignore them and move on if you’re not interested in the discussion. Accusing someone of being a paid troll when you have no way of telling the difference between 1 and 2 just makes you seem like an ad-hominem spewing asshole who doesn’t really give a shit that 1 could exist.
Problem with trying to debate with them is that they will never discuss with you in an honest fashion. They lie when it suits them, ignores points against them, jumps from user to user whenever there is a sliver of anything they can blow up on, and largely just end up derailing the thread. Like, there's someone in this thread who is seriously trying to convince us he's from HK, and simultaneously have the guts to pretend most of HK doesn't support this movement, while whining about how he can't find any open restaurants. How to you even begin to take that at face value?
The problem with ignoring them is that they continue to post bullshit, and end up derailing the thread anyways.
I get the frustration, but again your response should simply be to call out the lies by showing proof of your claims (like CorsairHero and others are doing), or ignoring him completely in-thread while reporting a potential issue to the mod team (which it looks like you’ve done).
As an example, can you conceive of anything this poster could do to prove to you that he’s from HK and not paid by the government? If you can’t, then some part of your logic somewhere is invalid and should be examined, because you’re incorrectly rejecting the possibility that he is 1 and not 2.
I don't necessarily refuse to believe that he's from HK, just if he is from HK as he claims, then it is extremely weird that he lives in such a bubble where he believes people aren't supporting it, despite hundreds of thousands to millions of people on the streets every day. It does cast a large shadow over his claim, but even if it happens to be true, it kinda just makes his whole position worse. In any case it is clear he is not arguing in good faith.
I worry for the day when the paid trolls get a bit more sophisticated and subtle. Nobody fucking buys it when a bu ch of low post users appear and are antagonistic to such a degree from the start. Preposterous false equivalences like ‘the entire Western media is all wrong and brainwashing you, not our media though.’
On the other hand I believe we’ve seen honest interlocutors amongst our Chinese brethren in this thread too, the difference between how they post is VERY apparent and has little to do with grasp of the language.
I could find Trumpsters that believe equally preposterous false equivalencies, that doesn’t necessarily mean they’re getting paid by Trump. Does the preposterousness of their beliefs have any impact on whether or not they believe them? As Excludos and DMCD rightfully point out, flawed arguments or ones in bad faith can be called out for what they are, regardless of whether or not they’re paid trolls. No need to throw around extra accusations that you can’t back up conclusively, it just makes your own arguments look weaker.
On October 15 2019 22:32 Ryzel wrote: So it’s been interesting to see some of the Chinese troll posts in this thread, but my concern is that I don’t think the claim that they’re trolls is falsifiable (which in turn means it’s ineffective). We have two options...
1) A Chinese lurker-turned-poster who can read English but not write it comfortably, deciding to create an account to weigh in on a meaningful/personal topic of discussion.
2) A government paid commenter with an ulterior motive to sway the conversation.
How do we actually tell the difference between these two? They're both low-post, not-so-great English, and pro-China/anti-protest.
My take: it doesn’t matter if they’re 1 or 2, you either debate their arguments and sources based on their own merits (like some have been doing in this thread), or you ignore them and move on if you’re not interested in the discussion. Accusing someone of being a paid troll when you have no way of telling the difference between 1 and 2 just makes you seem like an ad-hominem spewing asshole who doesn’t really give a shit that 1 could exist.
Problem with trying to debate with them is that they will never discuss with you in an honest fashion. They lie when it suits them, ignores points against them, jumps from user to user whenever there is a sliver of anything they can blow up on, and largely just end up derailing the thread. Like, there's someone in this thread who is seriously trying to convince us he's from HK, and simultaneously have the guts to pretend most of HK doesn't support this movement, while whining about how he can't find any open restaurants. How to you even begin to take that at face value?
The problem with ignoring them is that they continue to post bullshit, and end up derailing the thread anyways.
I get the frustration, but again your response should simply be to call out the lies by showing proof of your claims (like CorsairHero and others are doing), or ignoring him completely in-thread while reporting a potential issue to the mod team (which it looks like you’ve done).
As an example, can you conceive of anything this poster could do to prove to you that he’s from HK and not paid by the government? If you can’t, then some part of your logic somewhere is invalid and should be examined, because you’re incorrectly rejecting the possibility that he is 1 and not 2.
I don't necessarily refuse to believe that he's from HK, just if he is from HK as he claims, then it is extremely weird that he lives in such a bubble where he believes people aren't supporting it, despite hundreds of thousands to millions of people on the streets every day. It does cast a large shadow over his claim, but even if it happens to be true, it kinda just makes his whole position worse. In any case it is clear he is not arguing in good faith.
I worry for the day when the paid trolls get a bit more sophisticated and subtle. Nobody fucking buys it when a bu ch of low post users appear and are antagonistic to such a degree from the start. Preposterous false equivalences like ‘the entire Western media is all wrong and brainwashing you, not our media though.’
On the other hand I believe we’ve seen honest interlocutors amongst our Chinese brethren in this thread too, the difference between how they post is VERY apparent and has little to do with grasp of the language.
I could find Trumpsters that believe equally preposterous false equivalencies, that doesn’t necessarily mean they’re getting paid by Trump. Does the preposterousness of their beliefs have any impact on whether or not they believe them? As Excludos and DMCD rightfully point out, flawed arguments or ones in bad faith can be called out for what they are, regardless of whether or not they’re paid trolls. No need to throw around extra accusations that you can’t back up conclusively, it just makes your own arguments look weaker.
That is fair and I agree with that, I haven’t specifically mentioned individuals for the reasons you outlined so succinctly there.
On October 15 2019 22:32 Ryzel wrote: So it’s been interesting to see some of the Chinese troll posts in this thread, but my concern is that I don’t think the claim that they’re trolls is falsifiable (which in turn means it’s ineffective). We have two options...
1) A Chinese lurker-turned-poster who can read English but not write it comfortably, deciding to create an account to weigh in on a meaningful/personal topic of discussion.
2) A government paid commenter with an ulterior motive to sway the conversation.
How do we actually tell the difference between these two? They're both low-post, not-so-great English, and pro-China/anti-protest.
My take: it doesn’t matter if they’re 1 or 2, you either debate their arguments and sources based on their own merits (like some have been doing in this thread), or you ignore them and move on if you’re not interested in the discussion. Accusing someone of being a paid troll when you have no way of telling the difference between 1 and 2 just makes you seem like an ad-hominem spewing asshole who doesn’t really give a shit that 1 could exist.
Problem with trying to debate with them is that they will never discuss with you in an honest fashion. They lie when it suits them, ignores points against them, jumps from user to user whenever there is a sliver of anything they can blow up on, and largely just end up derailing the thread. Like, there's someone in this thread who is seriously trying to convince us he's from HK, and simultaneously have the guts to pretend most of HK doesn't support this movement, while whining about how he can't find any open restaurants. How to you even begin to take that at face value?
The problem with ignoring them is that they continue to post bullshit, and end up derailing the thread anyways.
Maybe TL could add some sort of new rule banning defence of authoritarianism/anti-human-rights-rethoric. then it wouldn't matter which of the above they are. Mods would have a way of dealing with them.
Though I agree that it is impossible to have a reasonable conversation with these people who claim that human rights are just a western concept and shouldn't apply to China, and TL might have a bit of a problem when it comes to people posting misinformation and lies, I wouldn't support banning people who are defending authoritarianism and being against human rights.
On October 16 2019 03:37 Dangermousecatdog wrote: Though I agree that it is impossible to have a reasonable conversation with these people who claim that human rights are just a western concept and shouldn't apply to China, and TL might have a bit of a problem when it comes to people posting misinformation and lies, I wouldn't support banning people who are defending authoritarianism and being against human rights.
TL is already doing the same thing with homophobia, racism and sexism though. Adding facism/authoritarianism to that list doesn't strike me as controversial.
To quote the old TL commandments:
" - Racist remarks will be shot down and you will be lynched.
- Homophobic comments will get shoved way up your ass.
- Sexist remarks of any kind whatsoever will be dealt with especially harshly. Yeah, we have female members and we sure as hell would like to keep them!"
On October 16 2019 03:37 Dangermousecatdog wrote: Though I agree that it is impossible to have a reasonable conversation with these people who claim that human rights are just a western concept and shouldn't apply to China, and TL might have a bit of a problem when it comes to people posting misinformation and lies, I wouldn't support banning people who are defending authoritarianism and being against human rights.
TL is already doing the same thing with homophobia, racism and sexism though. Adding facism/authoritarianism to that list doesn't strike me as controversial.
To quote the old TL commandments:
" - Racist remarks will be shot down and you will be lynched.
- Homophobic comments will get shoved way up your ass.
- Sexist remarks of any kind whatsoever will be dealt with especially harshly. Yeah, we have female members and we sure as hell would like to keep them!"
Racism, homophobia and sexism are clear when you see them though. If people defend Trump are they defending authoritarianism or against human rights? I would say so, others would say not.
People go mad when it comes to China. I agree it looks from where I'm sitting as though China is worse, but I've never been to China so I'm relying on the word of Western media which I don't trust You can't really use that as a tl.net rule.
More generally I'm shocked at how people haven't noticed the synergy between Trump's trade offensive against China and the Western media's offensive against China, and this sudden thing with Blizzard, South Park etc. and Reddit.
Its like they are all working together, when China, although they may have become a bit more aggressive, hasn't really changed at all.
Why am I so cynical? Because I saw this two years ago and it pretty much predicted everything we are hearing about China from the media and our governments now... https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6197028/
Doesn't mean none of its true, just that I take it with a pinch of salt to some extent.
EPT
