EPTPeople who are regulars know Dauntless is smart and capable of being both critical and thoughtful about his arguments. The reason he gets in there flaming matches with people is because he chooses To be aggressive and condescending while making argument s he knows are not widely accepted.
US Politics Feedback Thread - Page 226
| Forum Index > Website Feedback |
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
People who are regulars know Dauntless is smart and capable of being both critical and thoughtful about his arguments. The reason he gets in there flaming matches with people is because he chooses To be aggressive and condescending while making argument s he knows are not widely accepted. | ||
|
oBlade
United States5667 Posts
| ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On April 20 2019 01:18 Biff The Understudy wrote: Oh Danglar is talking about me 🥰 I really would never post one liners telling Nettles to get fucking real or call xDaunt our Teamliquid Sarah Sanders like pet if the posts I was answering to were not such insane bullshit and such insults to our intelligence to start with. Seriously though, this thread is shit again because people like Nettles or xDaunt come with absolutely no other intention than defending their side at any cost, no matter the facts. It’s tiring, it’s sterile, it’s boring and it’s simply shit. And no one is interested in that crap. This thread was MUCH better in the time of the megablog where those folks could « stick it to the liberals » between them and the few who were interested. If your point is that the NYT says that Barr was spot on, or that clearly Mueller report demonstrates that Trump did absolutely nothing wrong should really go post on r/the_donald, to discuss with more like minded folks from within that post factual bubble of yours. As for me I’d like to read from Plansix, Kwark, biology_major and other posters who happen to have some kind of intellectual integrity and don’t bend reality when it doesn’t go their way. I know it’s the new style of US politics, but thank you, we can do better here. I’d like to note that the attitude being expressed here - the general “I’m not acting shitty, all the people who disagree with me are” justification for posting like an ass - is something I hope the moderation isn’t endorsing. Would imply you have the right to post in ways that others would get banned for, just because you have the right general political opinions. Whether or not Daunt deserved his, I see no reason why this kind of posting is any better. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On April 20 2019 02:05 oBlade wrote: Those you disagree with will be more receptive to you in general when people have the basic respect to use a fellow site user's actual name and not these grade school pejorative butcherings like Dauntless and Dangle and so forth. Honestly, it’s a term of endearment and a cool name. And I only do it on my phone because autocorrect hates Xdaunt in ways I don’t understand. | ||
|
brian
United States9625 Posts
regardless, that criticism rings pretty hollow, especially when xdaunt himself frequently uses idiotic names for other people (though i think not forum users) quite consistently as well, in keeping with the traditions of the president. that awkward feeling when we keep ourselves to a higher standard than the potus. feels bad. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7902 Posts
On April 20 2019 02:06 LegalLord wrote: I’d like to note that the attitude being expressed here - the general “I’m not acting shitty, all the people who disagree with me are” justification for posting like an ass - is something I hope the moderation isn’t endorsing. Would imply you have the right to post in ways that others would get banned for, just because you have the right general political opinions. Whether or not Daunt deserved his, I see no reason why this kind of posting is any better. I posted a one liner to Nettles because there were nothing else to say. I never post one liners normally. And actually when I wrote the post I started to list the MYRIAD of damning articles for Trump in today’s NYT about the Mueller report. Then I thought that well, it was like trying to argument that the sky is blue at that point. I respect the forms of TL posting and I think I have become a relatively “clean” poster. But don’t expect me to lose my and everyone else’s time when I call out something so absurd. As for xDaunt, it’s not name calling. He goes to the same extends of bad faith as Sarah Sanders to deny that Trump would ever, eeeeever do something wrong. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15712 Posts
On April 20 2019 01:46 Gorsameth wrote: Pretty much everything xDaunt was saying was directly refuted by Muellers report, which he was commenting on what out having read it by his own admission. He got called out on that and went on a rant. While I think a temp ban was a bit heavy handed xDaunt should not have making the statements he did without having read the report himself. I am of the belief that TL's standards are higher than: x: (thing refuted by Mueller report) z: FYI that is refuted by the Mueller report. Did you read it? x: It is not refuted by the Mueller report and I have not read it z: But you are making arguments that we have confirmed are false and you would see that if you read the Mueller report x: no i'm not, y'all are wrong and this is the problem with the left, y'all. where do you go from there? It's just trash. It has no place on TL. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
oBlade
United States5667 Posts
On April 20 2019 02:12 Plansix wrote: Honestly, it’s a term of endearment and a cool name. And I only do it on my phone because autocorrect hates Xdaunt in ways I don’t understand. Okay I'll take your word on that one if it's endearing, but I saw someone else use it as well and also whenever I see a variation of Danglars name especially it's such cringe... Suspect the intent there is dyslogistic. Also quality is better than quantity with over phone posting. I'm on my phone right now for example and I want to take extra care not to sound like a YouTube subtitle, and also my phone allows me to capitalize a variety of letters not only limited to the D in xDaunt. Even does it automatically so I don't have to worry my head about shift keys. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15712 Posts
On April 20 2019 02:43 Plansix wrote: I agree that Nettles is a creature all to himself and shouldn’t be compared to anyone else in this discussion. His brand of galaxy brain shit posting is a gauntlet thrown down, demanding to be mocked. Most times I see him post, I check T_D and see the same articles. | ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
On April 20 2019 01:11 Mohdoo wrote: A simple glance at the state of the thread before and after people were unbanned makes it hard to disagree with the ban. The problem with this argument is that xdaunt's opposition could just as easily be the cause of the state of the thread. Theres only 3 or 4 conservatives really, so if you ban one, theres less actual argument. For the mods to ban him is just a handy way of dealing with the thread. | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
On April 20 2019 05:02 Doodsmack wrote: The problem with this argument is that xdaunt's opposition could just as easily be the cause of the state of the thread. Theres only 3 or 4 conservatives really, so if you ban one, theres less actual argument. For the mods to ban him is just a handy way of dealing with the thread. They could, but he was getting riled up in an argument where people were directly quoting things that were totally at odds with what he was arguing, but he plowed on. This discussion is pointless, goes nowhere, and for a very clear reason. You can toss a coin and say "well it could be heads or it could be tails, how can you be sure?", or you can just look at the coin. It is what it is. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On April 20 2019 02:33 Mohdoo wrote: I am of the belief that TL's standards are higher than: x: (thing refuted by Mueller report) z: FYI that is refuted by the Mueller report. Did you read it? x: It is not refuted by the Mueller report and I have not read it z: But you are making arguments that we have confirmed are false and you would see that if you read the Mueller report x: no i'm not, y'all are wrong and this is the problem with the left, y'all. where do you go from there? It's just trash. It has no place on TL. I thought he had a point at what was missing from the report, and debating on the conclusions. Several posters could not accept the simple argument and went around denying it or moving to other points. I thought all of it was in keeping with a debate thread. He just should've given up after a couple posts made on the same line. But you're eliding the real point. Is it ever ok to openly wonder why Mohdoo even posts? Can I call you TeamLiquid's version of Jussie Smollett or Stacey Abrams, if I do think you're really beyond the pale of lying or not accepting reality? Is that really conducive to debate? Does it matter if I'm right that you're posting like you were them, or have been bullshitting this whole time? On April 19 2019 11:11 Biff The Understudy wrote: Your bad faith is absolutely staggering. I don’t even know why you come here to discuss anymore; at that point you sound like a special Teamliquid version of Sarah Sanders. That's why I questioned if both posters deserved bans or warns. xDaunt's ban was for getting "too heated up." Maybe Biff's would be a personal attack and insult. You can call out bullshit without making a shitpost, and that's exactly what Biff did, and what people that like Biff's politics defend. On April 20 2019 01:30 Sermokala wrote: Biff shows clearly that he is he problem in the thread and not daunt. Everything he posted above is about antagonizing xdaunt until he gets banned. Everything he posted above is bathed in prejudged malice twords people he disagrees with shows his intent was to get daunt banned by baiting him. I mean can anyone not see it as a clear flame bait manifesto? On April 20 2019 01:27 Sent. wrote: If it's so uninteresting why can't you (and all the other posters claiming xDaunt and Danglars come with nothing but bad intentions) just stop replying to their posts instead of complaining about the thread being full of xDaunt arguing with posters like you? If you can't find a nice way to say you think the posts are bullshit, how about ignoring the offending post. You're just making the thread shitty and blaming everybody but yourself. I'm really hoping for some mod feedback in this thread, because it's clear that people forgive members of their tribe the same behavior they find offensive in members of the opposing tribe. | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
On April 19 2019 03:24 Seeker wrote: I have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about. As it is, unlike others insinuations, I wasn't trying to get xdaunt banned. I was exploring what is or isn't or what should be or should not be permissible in the US pol thread. Is writing "I already wrote that" repeatedly to be considered against good conversation to the extent that it is warnable? For example, you have no idea what I am talking about. Does it sound like I come across as deliberately obtuse? It should do. Those are pretty much word for word direct quotes of recent thread activity. I was trying to be funny, but in this case as a side effect, it comes across as being deliberately obtuse, as opposed to engaging in good engagement. That is exactly the bafflement when engaging with xdaunt and danglars. Is that the kind of activity that should be condoned, or should it be condemned? Kind of pointless to report the posts anyways since xdaunt in the meantime appears capable of getting himself banned without my input anyways. Just for additional context, my original post was posted before the redacted Mueller report was released. I was just tired of reading "nothingburger" by xdaunt over and over again even before it was released and in fustration, I wrote what I wrote. It seemed to work though, since he stopped writing it; at least for the time being. | ||
Seeker
Where dat snitch at?37032 Posts
On April 20 2019 07:14 Dangermousecatdog wrote: As it is, unlike others insinuations, I wasn't trying to get xdaunt banned. I was exploring what is or isn't or what should be or should not be permissible in the US pol thread. Is writing "I already wrote that" repeatedly to be considered against good conversation to the extent that it is warnable? For example, you have no idea what I am talking about. Does it sound like I come across as deliberately obtuse? It should do. Those are pretty much word for word direct quotes of recent thread activity. I was trying to be funny, but in this case as a side effect, it comes across as being deliberately obtuse, as opposed to engaging in good engagement. That is exactly the bafflement when engaging with xdaunt and danglars. Is that the kind of activity that should be condoned, or should it be condemned? Kind of pointless to report the posts anyways since xdaunt in the meantime appears capable of getting himself banned without my input anyways. Just for additional context, my original post was posted before the redacted Mueller report was released. I was just tired of reading "nothingburger" by xdaunt over and over again even before it was released and in fustration, I wrote what I wrote. It seemed to work though, since he stopped writing it; at least for the time being. Well, first off, since you didn't provide any context before, there was no way to tell what you were talking about. Secondly, no, that is not an acceptable way of posting. It is basically an excuse to try to get out of providing actual meaningful answers. A response like "I've already explained this before, I'm not going to do it again," doesn't help the discussion progress forward at all. At the very least, if you don't want to type out something that you've already said, then you should provide a link to your previous post so that people can go back and read it. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
8998 Posts
Daunt was called out, by me and m4ini, about his drawing conclusions on a report he had not read and would not accept that. Then Igne comes in and tries to massage the word exonerate as to mean what Daunt wanted it to me. GH follows by accepting Igne's comments and speaks for him, while everyone else has seemingly moved onto something different. Daunt gets banned for harmful language (Danglars should also be warned for his post above, because he essentially did the same thing). I defended Daunt's emotionally outburst. To sum it all up, posters who can't stand to be called out on bullshit, complain they are being targeted. When in reality, most posters just want to correct their wrong statements and to get a real, definitive answer to questions that give us more of an idea of what they are really trying to speak to. If we ask for clarification, we mean just that because something has been lost. But some people can't accept they were lied to, misinformed, or just plain wrong. Did I miss anything? | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7902 Posts
When Barr made his statement we got an avalanche of obnoxious and smug triomphant posts by Danglar and Daunt talking about how stupid we were and who should go to jail among those people who were so, so, so unfair to Donald. When it appeared that, well, Barr totally misrepresented the report because of course he did, and that actually it’s pretty horrifying, Daunt just started to fight in an emotional and incoherent way instead of backing up. Maybe if in your universe, this report could never be bad, or never be good for Trump because you too biased to accept that the guy is indeed a criminal, or indeed innocent, then you shouldn’t post here. Period. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On April 20 2019 08:35 JimmiC wrote: You can get off the soap box man. I mean your post to complain about bill was pure passive aggressive, and then even now while you're pretending to be all responsible and even handed you throw out some more passive aggressive digs. You are not a good advocate for anyone because of your long history of being a jerk. You're again much mistaken. I said I'd have to wait before rendering judgement precisely because moderators discuss things behind the scenes and some time elapses before they decide whether Biff's behavior was also actionable. You can compare reserving judgement to what passive aggression is when you look at what Seeker called "passive/aggressively hint that some users need to be actioned" in your post here and evilfatsh1t's post here. On April 20 2019 09:05 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote: From what I can see, is that when people are called out, they dig in and get combative. Then when continued to be made aware that they are wrong, they refuse to accept it. Then we come here and take further digs at the poster in question. Daunt was called out, by me and m4ini, about his drawing conclusions on a report he had not read and would not accept that. Then Igne comes in and tries to massage the word exonerate as to mean what Daunt wanted it to me. GH follows by accepting Igne's comments and speaks for him, while everyone else has seemingly moved onto something different. Daunt gets banned for harmful language (Danglars should also be warned for his post above, because he essentially did the same thing). I defended Daunt's emotionally outburst. To sum it all up, posters who can't stand to be called out on bullshit, complain they are being targeted. When in reality, most posters just want to correct their wrong statements and to get a real, definitive answer to questions that give us more of an idea of what they are really trying to speak to. If we ask for clarification, we mean just that because something has been lost. But some people can't accept they were lied to, misinformed, or just plain wrong. Did I miss anything? You might as well say xDaunt called out Biff's "addict[ion] to Trump impeachment fantasy porn", just as Biff called out xDaunt's "bad faith" and "TeamLiquid version of Sarah Sanders." Also, it's comical that you also think I should be warned for harmful language. On April 20 2019 15:00 Biff The Understudy wrote: Well the problem is very simple: the report could be as damning as humanly possible, a few conservative here would keep saying “witch hunt” and “nothingburger”, and I suspect that if the report did exonerate Trump, a few of us liberals would keep saying that he is clearly guilty. When Barr made his statement we got an avalanche of obnoxious and smug triomphant posts by Danglar and Daunt talking about how stupid we were and who should go to jail among those people who were so, so, so unfair to Donald. When it appeared that, well, Barr totally misrepresented the report because of course he did, and that actually it’s pretty horrifying, Daunt just started to fight in an emotional and incoherent way instead of backing up. Maybe if in your universe, this report could never be bad, or never be good for Trump because you too biased to accept that the guy is indeed a criminal, or indeed innocent, then you shouldn’t post here. Period. Yes, and if you think you're just attacking Barr because he said the truth about the report, of course you're going to say you just don't like Barr for not complying in acting to remove a president you dislike. That's how differing views on the same thing work. I'm capable of examining the issues and calling out bias in others, as much as you wish that right was reserved to yourself. If you would practice as you preached here, you'd not resort to insults and actually act like you had arguments and not just accusations of bias. | ||
| ||
