| Forum Index > Website Feedback |
|
farvacola
United States18820 Posts
On September 25 2018 03:15 Jockmcplop wrote: This is exactly what no-one in the us politics thread currently has nostalgia for. Cheers to this notion, my thoughts exactly. | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
| ||
|
Excludos
Norway8000 Posts
On September 25 2018 03:14 GreenHorizons wrote: Jock and Farv have opined (pretty much exactly on schedule) so I'll reiterate. So just to keep harping on this because you're consistently dancing around the porridge: You're not going to provide evidence for the accusation despite repeated requests? Unless Seeker has specifically asked you to stop replying on this issue, then this is a very sad copout. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On September 25 2018 04:02 Dangermousecatdog wrote: And that is exactly why the US pol thread is the best it has ever been. The repeatedly banned shitposters who aren't posting there anymore. Instead they come here instead where they can "you're misunderstanding me" and "I already told you, go back and read my first post" all they want. “The best is has ever been.” This made my day, thanks. It’s the echo chamber you always wanted it to be. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
On September 25 2018 04:34 Danglars wrote: “The best is has ever been.” This made my day, thanks. It’s the echo chamber you always wanted it to be. My posts are frequently interposed with bw and sc2 jokes, thank you for being the first one sweet enough to point them out. Also what is the echo chamber you think I want the US pol thread to be? Don't wimp out like GH, go and tell us. | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
On September 25 2018 04:34 Danglars wrote: “The best is has ever been.” This made my day, thanks. It’s the echo chamber you always wanted it to be. If echo chamber = discussion free of people looking to pick pointless fights and never back down, then yes, yes it is an echo chamber. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
| ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
Or is this supposed to be one of your real contrary position with strong dividing lines where you are not convincing somebody of your position? Heck, what does a real contrary position is supposed to mean? That there are false positions? Are you more real than other people are the more false than you? Are their positions just imaginary? Ultimately your problem is not making 6 posts and leaving it at that like you are claiming to be. It's making 100 posts of which apart from the first are deflective, accusing others of shitposting, whataboutism, claiming you have explained your position when in fact you have endlessly flip flopping contradictory positions, endless posts about what you did or didn't write, denials of what you wrote, even when quoted on, and generally raging about "libs" and leftists" and "liberals" and "communists". Then when you rightfully get tempbanned for the nth time, you come here to whine that you are victimised and all the other lib shitposters are not. Meanwhile GH does exactly the same thing but replaces lib shitposters with conservative shitposters. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
The main gist is if you’re going to use sarcasm and biting words, you should appropriately be able to take them directed back at you. That does not exist for the American right within the thread, and I think the cake bakers discussion proves it. I direct you to the thread discussion in this thread at the time to see how many people spoke up about the double standard at the time. It just leads to an echo chamber. | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
The irony that I've never gotten banned was lost on the usual suspects. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On September 25 2018 06:18 Dangermousecatdog wrote: Just answer the question Danglars. What is this echo chamber you think I want the US pol thread to be? That’s the answer I just gave you. The quietness of the thread is the stark lack of major viewpoint diversity as characterizes America. You just said it’s nevwr been better. You dismissed my points. So I think you have my answer and disagree. On July 17 2018 10:15 IgnE wrote: yeah i can tell you whats unacceptable. its the most pitiful, slow-witted form of goal-post shifting, born of your seeming inability to discern a particular argumentative strand. you fired back a bunch of bullshit when xdaunt rightly pointed out that "foe" meant "economic/trade foe" because he didnt include some inane statements trump made about unemployment and his family's immigration history? that stuff is totally irrelevant to the point in dispute (that trump was casually throwing around bellicose language and calling the EU our military "foe") and appears to be a purely reflexive attack on your part in response to a hashtag. the execrable part is that your post was straight up embarrassingly off target to the point that your conclusions and accusatory capstone makes me question your reading comprehension. either that or you are incapable of telling the difference between "trump thinks the EU is our foe. its unclear how he means that, foe usually means strategic and military enemy" and "trump thinks the eu is taking advantage of us in trade. what an idiot" simply because both are stupid, despite being stupid in different ways. the most important and egregious folly in my view, however, is in your even bothering to look for logical inconsistencies or any meaning at all in anything trump says and then shitting up the thread with it. you fundamentally misunderstand trump's particular idiocy and you only redouble his bullshit with, and i want to emphasize the adjective here, stupid attacks on xdaunt Have you changed your mind on IgnE’s criticism? If not, if you’re still convinced that it’s wrong, then maybe you can understand that I don’t agree with you on the health of the thread. This is a disagreement between us, not a misunderstanding. | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9486 Posts
The problem as I see it is that diverse viewpoints would indeed make the thread better but we end up having to pay for it with page upon page of useless pointless bickering. I've had great conversations with both yourself and GH, but take a look at the last page or so of this thread and try to imagine what possible use this conversation could be to someone reading it. Take yourself out of the argument and just read it and try to imagine how frustrating it is for people who want to discuss political issues when the entire thread is spent debating what couple of posters did or didn't say, did or didn't mean etc. It may be that in every instance you are correct (here's a tip: most of the time no-one cares who's right and who's wrong, most people are here for interesting discussion), and it may well be that your viewpoint on political issues would make the thread a more lively and better place, but when the average visitor has to wade through mountains of nonsense to find said viewpoint it fast becomes a waste of everyone's time. And eventually it always ends up with that. The easiest thing to point to in those cases is the common denominator(s). | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
For real. No claims that you already answered it, don't just quote me asking the question and tell me that's my own answer, just answer the question. ____________ If you want to Danglars deflect(tm) into the usual suspects criticism of me then do so, but only after you have answered the question. No, quoting me asking the question and tell me that's my own answer is not an answer. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On September 25 2018 06:44 Jockmcplop wrote: @danglars The problem as I see it is that diverse viewpoints would indeed make the thread better but we end up having to pay for it with page upon page of useless pointless bickering. I've had great conversations with both yourself and GH, but take a look at the last page or so of this thread and try to imagine what possible use this conversation could be to someone reading it. Take yourself out of the argument and just read it and try to imagine how frustrating it is for people who want to discuss political issues when the entire thread is spent debating what couple of posters did or didn't say, did or didn't mean etc. It may be that in every instance you are correct (here's a tip: most of the time no-one cares who's right and who's wrong, most people are here for interesting discussion), and it may well be that your viewpoint on political issues would make the thread a more lively and better place, but when the average visitor has to wade through mountains of nonsense to find said viewpoint it fast becomes a waste of everyone's time. And eventually it always ends up with that. The easiest thing to point to in those cases is the common denominator(s). This is the website feedback thread, so naturally it will be about posts and posters and moderation. Jockmcplop, it’s going to look shitty when the start and focus is one side justifying certain bans, and the other side defending, and the first side accusing of whining, or being children, or whatever. Im fine dropping the thread with posters who don’t comprehend the argument to debate arguments. It’s a little unnerving that they come back with accusations of avoiding them or whatnot, but whatever. I don’t have to defend myself in a forum where everyone can read what I actually said and what the responder took it to mean. My complaint on moderation is applying one standard to conservative posters and another to liberal posters. I think an even hand would soon yield less arguments on semantics and twisting words. But that kind of posting style is broadly tolerated for a political worldview, so basically they know they can get away with it. That’s my issue. If every time I bring up the baker’s individual rights, and I hear back that his rights don’t matter if they affect a gay couple, I’ll continue it a little to see if they can listen to reason. Then I’ll drop it. I want to fairly engage with anyone that reads arguments and responds intelligently, and in that excess of caution, sometimes I go on unproductive strings which might just be misunderstandings instead of rigid ideology. I see no longer way around it for the start. Though obviously, I’ll break it off in the interest of hearing other subjects when all evidence and argument has been aired (and I’ve done that, repeatedly, if you’ll look back this year). I can only say you know the caliber of poster here so any disagreement will involve some wading just because of who posts on the forum. | ||
|
Excludos
Norway8000 Posts
On September 25 2018 06:20 Womwomwom wrote: Like I keep saying, the conservative Supreme Court would so damn easy if they had picked someone else and/or Kav did them a solid and bailed out. Trump is probably betting correctly that Republican supporters want the conservative Supreme Court so much that they probably don’t care who gets on the bench so long as he’s “conservative” enough. Life really doesn’t have to be this hard. This post infuriates me. Not because of the content, but because if anyone else posted a twitter message like that they would get a warning. I don't mind the message, I understand that sometimes a source is necessary for continued discourse. However if the rules state that they're not allowed, I wish mods would at least follow them themselves. Or if the rule is so rubbish that mods can't follow it themselves (which I believe it is), then change it to something more reasonable. Somewhere there is a middle ground between spamming twitter messages with no discourse and never being allowed to post a single one despite it being relevant to the discussion at hand. | ||
Seeker
Where dat snitch at?36961 Posts
On September 25 2018 07:08 Excludos wrote: This post infuriates me. Not because of the content, but because if anyone else posted a twitter message like that they would get a warning. I don't mind the message, I understand that sometimes a source is necessary for continued discourse. However if the rules state that they're not allowed, I wish mods would at least follow them themselves. Or if the rule is so rubbish that mods can't follow it themselves (which I believe it is), then change it to something more reasonable. Somewhere there is a middle ground between spamming twitter messages with no discourse and never being allowed to post a single one despite it being relevant to the discussion at hand. Let me take care of this. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States22991 Posts
Would I be right to presume our relationship is still too raw to joke about this? | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 Counter-Strike Heroes of the Storm Other Games |
|
PiGosaur Monday
GSL Code S
ByuN vs Rogue
herO vs Cure
Replay Cast
GSL Code S
Classic vs Reynor
GuMiho vs Maru
The PondCast
RSL Revival
GSL Code S
OSC
Korean StarCraft League
RSL Revival
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
