• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 04:18
CEST 10:18
KST 17:18
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
RSL Season 1 - Final Week6[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall12HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview18Classic wins Code S Season 2 (2025)16Code S RO4 & Finals Preview: herO, Rogue, Classic, GuMiho0
Community News
Esports World Cup 2025 - Brackets Revealed12Weekly Cups (July 7-13): Classic continues to roll4Team TLMC #5 - Submission extension3Firefly given lifetime ban by ESIC following match-fixing investigation17$25,000 Streamerzone StarCraft Pro Series announced7
StarCraft 2
General
RSL Revival patreon money discussion thread Esports World Cup 2025 - Brackets Revealed Who will win EWC 2025? The GOAT ranking of GOAT rankings Weekly Cups (July 7-13): Classic continues to roll
Tourneys
FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event RSL: Revival, a new crowdfunded tournament series $5,100+ SEL Season 2 Championship (SC: Evo) WardiTV Mondays Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response Simple Questions Simple Answers
Custom Maps
External Content
Mutation # 482 Wheel of Misfortune Mutation # 481 Fear and Lava Mutation # 480 Moths to the Flame Mutation # 479 Worn Out Welcome
Brood War
General
Flash Announces (and Retracts) Hiatus From ASL BW General Discussion BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ Starcraft in widescreen A cwal.gg Extension - Easily keep track of anyone
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues Cosmonarchy Pro Showmatches CSL Xiamen International Invitational [BSL20] Non-Korean Championship 4x BSL + 4x China
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers I am doing this better than progamers do.
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Nintendo Switch Thread Path of Exile CCLP - Command & Conquer League Project The PlayStation 5
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Russo-Ukrainian War Thread Stop Killing Games - European Citizens Initiative Summer Games Done Quick 2025! Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine
Fan Clubs
SKT1 Classic Fan Club! Maru Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
[Manga] One Piece Movie Discussion! Anime Discussion Thread [\m/] Heavy Metal Thread
Sports
Formula 1 Discussion TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 2024 - 2025 Football Thread NBA General Discussion NHL Playoffs 2024
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Men Take Risks, Women Win Ga…
TrAiDoS
momentary artworks from des…
tankgirl
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Trip to the Zoo
micronesia
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 790 users

US Politics Feedback Thread - Page 251

Forum Index > Website Feedback
Post a Reply
Prev 1 249 250 251 252 253 322 Next
JimmiC
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
Canada22817 Posts
July 25 2019 15:06 GMT
#5001
--- Nuked ---
brian
Profile Blog Joined August 2004
United States9617 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-07-25 15:19:03
July 25 2019 15:10 GMT
#5002
as mentioned, i was merely responding. i’m not here trying to call you out, but if you expected me not to respond you were mistaken. i think it has been clear my only complaint was the volume of posts where you mischaracterize a position and never back it up, and nothing to any other affect. complain about me away. i’m happy to leave it here, though, noting again i have yet to find the words bloody or violent. as mentioned previously, that’s all i’m looking for.

i’ll also note your response amounts to ‘read all this,’ which is directly part of your complaint of GH. embarrassing. provide the quote or don’t.

talking about self reflection is pretty funny in that context.
JimmiC
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
Canada22817 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-07-26 00:30:00
July 25 2019 15:12 GMT
#5003
--- Nuked ---
JimmiC
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
Canada22817 Posts
July 25 2019 15:18 GMT
#5004
--- Nuked ---
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23202 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-07-25 15:20:19
July 25 2019 15:18 GMT
#5005
On July 26 2019 00:12 JimmiC wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 25 2019 23:41 GreenHorizons wrote:
GH comes at person X (right now it is me) over whatever, we go back and forth, a bunch of his buddies all jump in to bully, it becomes 1 against the world, and if that doesn't work better run to the teachers.


You have no idea how hard fought that was (to the degree it's true). The thread you pulled p6's (He never showed those PM's did he?) quotes from is testament to that. What you definitely don't see there, is what you're describing (unless you invert the parties) . This thread is a lot of that too. Perhaps zlefin was before your time? I miss zlefin ironically.

Another thing, if you want to say something is your position don't do the opposite. What do I mean by this, if you say you are not going to post for a month 2 weeks in don't post that you are not posting. + Show Spoiler + If you want to regain trust with a Mod you don't get along with, don't post a "redacted" PM on here to stir up trouble.+ Show Spoiler + PM them back and ask. If you are not comfortable with them PM another mod and ask their advice. Also, why would a Mod not like you? Is it a right wing conspiracy? Or perhaps are you at fault, I'm sure there are Mods that don't like me, that is because I have created frustrating work for them, not because of poor me.


This is an example of something I would consider ambiguous "direct questions" it's unclear to me whether I'm required to respond to or not? For which I don't know what else to do but ask for clarification.


There is nothing for you to respond too, just a suggestion that, you look at all the "fights" you have had. The two you mentioned, the one with P6, the one with me, the one with the Mod or Mod's, the one with Velr, the Blazer with Dave, and all the other ones I don't know about.

And reflect on, wow I sure get into a lot of these, perhaps there is something I am doing that is creating this situation. Take some responsibility and decide, do I want to keep having these and keep behaving like this or not. If you do, that is completely fine with me. But then stop coming into this thread like some Martyr or victim and just deal with all the people you are condescending too and then get in fights with you.

Completely up to you. And as I mentioned to Brian if you wish to stop talking about it, stop talking about it.

And no, this is not me calling the kettle black, I am OK to continue to talk about it. I have through PM with those who said they didnt want to publicly. And other than Brian it went quite well. If you would prefer to discuss there, I'm fine, prefer on here that is good too, prefer not to, that is great too. Just don't say you don't want to discuss it, don't like drama, and then continue to discuss it.


It's directed at me, there are question marks and I don't want to risk it. I think you literally saying I'm not supposed to answer the questions should cover me though, so ty.

If people are emboldening you in PM and not publicly I don't think it's with your best interests in their minds imo, but do you.
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
brian
Profile Blog Joined August 2004
United States9617 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-07-25 15:21:59
July 25 2019 15:20 GMT
#5006
forget it, i’ll let that speak for itself.
JimmiC
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
Canada22817 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-07-26 00:30:53
July 25 2019 15:22 GMT
#5007
--- Nuked ---
JimmiC
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
Canada22817 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-07-25 15:26:01
July 25 2019 15:25 GMT
#5008
--- Nuked ---
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23202 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-07-25 15:39:37
July 25 2019 15:28 GMT
#5009
On July 26 2019 00:22 JimmiC wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 26 2019 00:18 GreenHorizons wrote:
On July 26 2019 00:12 JimmiC wrote:
On July 25 2019 23:41 GreenHorizons wrote:
GH comes at person X (right now it is me) over whatever, we go back and forth, a bunch of his buddies all jump in to bully, it becomes 1 against the world, and if that doesn't work better run to the teachers.


You have no idea how hard fought that was (to the degree it's true). The thread you pulled p6's (He never showed those PM's did he?) quotes from is testament to that. What you definitely don't see there, is what you're describing (unless you invert the parties) . This thread is a lot of that too. Perhaps zlefin was before your time? I miss zlefin ironically.

Another thing, if you want to say something is your position don't do the opposite. What do I mean by this, if you say you are not going to post for a month 2 weeks in don't post that you are not posting. + Show Spoiler + If you want to regain trust with a Mod you don't get along with, don't post a "redacted" PM on here to stir up trouble.+ Show Spoiler + PM them back and ask. If you are not comfortable with them PM another mod and ask their advice. Also, why would a Mod not like you? Is it a right wing conspiracy? Or perhaps are you at fault, I'm sure there are Mods that don't like me, that is because I have created frustrating work for them, not because of poor me.


This is an example of something I would consider ambiguous "direct questions" it's unclear to me whether I'm required to respond to or not? For which I don't know what else to do but ask for clarification.


There is nothing for you to respond too, just a suggestion that, you look at all the "fights" you have had. The two you mentioned, the one with P6, the one with me, the one with the Mod or Mod's, the one with Velr, the Blazer with Dave, and all the other ones I don't know about.

And reflect on, wow I sure get into a lot of these, perhaps there is something I am doing that is creating this situation. Take some responsibility and decide, do I want to keep having these and keep behaving like this or not. If you do, that is completely fine with me. But then stop coming into this thread like some Martyr or victim and just deal with all the people you are condescending too and then get in fights with you.

Completely up to you. And as I mentioned to Brian if you wish to stop talking about it, stop talking about it.

And no, this is not me calling the kettle black, I am OK to continue to talk about it. I have through PM with those who said they didnt want to publicly. And other than Brian it went quite well. If you would prefer to discuss there, I'm fine, prefer on here that is good too, prefer not to, that is great too. Just don't say you don't want to discuss it, don't like drama, and then continue to discuss it.


It's directed at me, there are question marks and I don't want to risk it. I think you literally saying I'm not supposed to answer the questions should cover me though, so ty.

If people are emboldening you in PM and not publicly I don't think it's with your best interests in their minds imo, but do you.



I am literally saying you are in control of your answers so answer what you want but think about it. All these PM's where you say it was the other guy, but you got banned, maybe them too. Consider that perhaps you are not a innocent victim and maybe not even the perpetrator, but perhaps a equal contributor. And that you seem to be the guy with the most of these situations, so how could you be contributing to it.


Shit. Are you saying those are direct questions, not rhetorical?

One of my bans I was cited admitting fault as part of the reason I was banned so... Yeah, I've considered it lol:

Yes, JimmiC posted something stupid and insensitive. He went too far. But you also admitted that you weren't completely free of fault either...


On July 26 2019 00:25 JimmiC wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 26 2019 00:20 brian wrote:
forget it, i’ll let that speak for itself.



I'll throw this out too anyone who has been saying I'm completely wrong.

If someone believes that revolution with out small arms is impossible. And then constantly brings up that we need a revolution. Is it not logical to believe that he means a revolution with small arms?

Is a revolution that requires the use of small arms a peaceful revolution?

+ Show Spoiler +
If you want something to speak for itself, the best way to do so is to let it speak for it self. Not to say "I'll let it speak for itself.


Just in the spirit of trying to improve my communication, what you're supposed to do is argue against the necessity of revolution, and/or ways to keep it peaceful, not that people die in them.

To your credit, you have made efforts on those fronts, when you're talking about what you think is working and how we can get from here to there without revolution. But instead of addressing my counter-arguments about how almost all of the emissions progress the US and Europe has made was just outsourced to poorer/less regulated countries, the ineffectiveness of electoralism in the US, the countless dead and suffering to maintain the status quo and so on, you lurch into these tirades where you essentially insist I'd prefer a violent revolution over oligarchs peacefully transitioning into a more equitable society or indict me for recognizing it's inevitability (in the same sense countless people through history have)

Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable. — John F. Kennedy
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
JimmiC
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
Canada22817 Posts
July 25 2019 15:30 GMT
#5010
--- Nuked ---
Fildun
Profile Joined December 2012
Netherlands4122 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-07-25 15:42:27
July 25 2019 15:38 GMT
#5011
On July 26 2019 00:25 JimmiC wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 26 2019 00:20 brian wrote:
forget it, i’ll let that speak for itself.



I'll throw this out too anyone who has been saying I'm completely wrong.

If someone believes that revolution with out small arms is impossible. And then constantly brings up that we need a revolution. Is it not logical to believe that he means a revolution with small arms?

Is a revolution that requires the use of small arms a peaceful revolution?

+ Show Spoiler +
If you want something to speak for itself, the best way to do so is to let it speak for it self. Not to say "I'll let it speak for itself.

So, just to be clear, you don't see an ethical/moral difference between the positions of
1. "calling for a revolution with the use of small arms"
and
2. "calling for a revolution that is most likely impossible without small arms being in the possession of the revolutionaries"

Edit:

GH says multiple times that "small arms (whether used or not)" are instrumental to a successful revolution. You've responded to this multiple times (including quoting that position in this thread).
Every time you characterize that position as GH wanting a revolution that "requires the use of small arms".
Would you call that a mischaracterization?
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23202 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-07-25 15:57:08
July 25 2019 15:48 GMT
#5012
On July 26 2019 00:30 JimmiC wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 26 2019 00:28 GreenHorizons wrote:
On July 26 2019 00:22 JimmiC wrote:
On July 26 2019 00:18 GreenHorizons wrote:
On July 26 2019 00:12 JimmiC wrote:
On July 25 2019 23:41 GreenHorizons wrote:
GH comes at person X (right now it is me) over whatever, we go back and forth, a bunch of his buddies all jump in to bully, it becomes 1 against the world, and if that doesn't work better run to the teachers.


You have no idea how hard fought that was (to the degree it's true). The thread you pulled p6's (He never showed those PM's did he?) quotes from is testament to that. What you definitely don't see there, is what you're describing (unless you invert the parties) . This thread is a lot of that too. Perhaps zlefin was before your time? I miss zlefin ironically.

Another thing, if you want to say something is your position don't do the opposite. What do I mean by this, if you say you are not going to post for a month 2 weeks in don't post that you are not posting. + Show Spoiler + If you want to regain trust with a Mod you don't get along with, don't post a "redacted" PM on here to stir up trouble.+ Show Spoiler + PM them back and ask. If you are not comfortable with them PM another mod and ask their advice. Also, why would a Mod not like you? Is it a right wing conspiracy? Or perhaps are you at fault, I'm sure there are Mods that don't like me, that is because I have created frustrating work for them, not because of poor me.


This is an example of something I would consider ambiguous "direct questions" it's unclear to me whether I'm required to respond to or not? For which I don't know what else to do but ask for clarification.


There is nothing for you to respond too, just a suggestion that, you look at all the "fights" you have had. The two you mentioned, the one with P6, the one with me, the one with the Mod or Mod's, the one with Velr, the Blazer with Dave, and all the other ones I don't know about.

And reflect on, wow I sure get into a lot of these, perhaps there is something I am doing that is creating this situation. Take some responsibility and decide, do I want to keep having these and keep behaving like this or not. If you do, that is completely fine with me. But then stop coming into this thread like some Martyr or victim and just deal with all the people you are condescending too and then get in fights with you.

Completely up to you. And as I mentioned to Brian if you wish to stop talking about it, stop talking about it.

And no, this is not me calling the kettle black, I am OK to continue to talk about it. I have through PM with those who said they didnt want to publicly. And other than Brian it went quite well. If you would prefer to discuss there, I'm fine, prefer on here that is good too, prefer not to, that is great too. Just don't say you don't want to discuss it, don't like drama, and then continue to discuss it.


It's directed at me, there are question marks and I don't want to risk it. I think you literally saying I'm not supposed to answer the questions should cover me though, so ty.

If people are emboldening you in PM and not publicly I don't think it's with your best interests in their minds imo, but do you.



I am literally saying you are in control of your answers so answer what you want but think about it. All these PM's where you say it was the other guy, but you got banned, maybe them too. Consider that perhaps you are not a innocent victim and maybe not even the perpetrator, but perhaps a equal contributor. And that you seem to be the guy with the most of these situations, so how could you be contributing to it.


Shit. Are you saying those are direct questions, not rhetorical?

One of my bans I was cited admitting fault as part of the reason I was banned so... Yeah, I've considered it lol:

Yes, JimmiC posted something stupid and insensitive. He went too far. But you also admitted that you weren't completely free of fault either...



Yes I'm very aware of that, that was when you got banned because you submitted our PM's to the Mods in an attempt to get me banned and it ended up with us BOTH banned for BOTH being jerks.

Unlike you I understand when I have been a jerk and am not arguing that I am not, or have not been one. I'm pointing arguing that you are not a victim of me or moderation, but rather a victim of your own behavior.



The thing is, I got permed, one of the legitimate critiques that came with it was my jerkiness. I argued it was a reflection from particular posters. Some mods/posters agreed more or less, some didn't. Regardless, since I've returned I've tried desperately not to reflect the vitriol I (in some ways earned) from various posters. This is clear to anyone with any familiarity of me when I was at my worst. As well as take responsibility for my role in conflicts. What I think an increasing number of people are coming around to, is that with you in particular, that doesn't seem to be helping at all. Others I've previously had conflicts with (brian for example) see this all rather clearly.

I'm not saying this to embarrass you or win an argument but to sincerely try to demonstrate what I consider fruitful dialogue and do my part to invite you to join in.
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
brian
Profile Blog Joined August 2004
United States9617 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-07-25 15:54:24
July 25 2019 15:50 GMT
#5013
what the hell happened to P6 anyway? what a bummer that he has stopped posting with us. although i do admire his restraint in doing so, considering it seems he still visits the forums. i had tried to walk away from the politics thread a few times and clearly have failed.
farvacola
Profile Blog Joined January 2011
United States18825 Posts
July 25 2019 15:58 GMT
#5014
He posted to remember incontrol and that was the last I’ve seen of him.
"when the Dead Kennedys found out they had skinhead fans, they literally wrote a song titled 'Nazi Punks Fuck Off'"
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23202 Posts
July 25 2019 16:10 GMT
#5015
On July 26 2019 00:58 farvacola wrote:
He posted to remember incontrol and that was the last I’ve seen of him.


I've speculated 1000 things in my mind but I'm sure it'll turn out to be the least satisfying one I could have eventually imagined. fwiw (and despite being reminded of that moment from p6 lol) I miss his posting too, but respect if restraint has anything to do with it.
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
JimmiC
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
Canada22817 Posts
July 25 2019 16:15 GMT
#5016
--- Nuked ---
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23202 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-07-25 16:33:47
July 25 2019 16:30 GMT
#5017
On July 26 2019 01:15 JimmiC wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 26 2019 00:48 GreenHorizons wrote:
On July 26 2019 00:30 JimmiC wrote:
On July 26 2019 00:28 GreenHorizons wrote:
On July 26 2019 00:22 JimmiC wrote:
On July 26 2019 00:18 GreenHorizons wrote:
On July 26 2019 00:12 JimmiC wrote:
On July 25 2019 23:41 GreenHorizons wrote:
GH comes at person X (right now it is me) over whatever, we go back and forth, a bunch of his buddies all jump in to bully, it becomes 1 against the world, and if that doesn't work better run to the teachers.


You have no idea how hard fought that was (to the degree it's true). The thread you pulled p6's (He never showed those PM's did he?) quotes from is testament to that. What you definitely don't see there, is what you're describing (unless you invert the parties) . This thread is a lot of that too. Perhaps zlefin was before your time? I miss zlefin ironically.

Another thing, if you want to say something is your position don't do the opposite. What do I mean by this, if you say you are not going to post for a month 2 weeks in don't post that you are not posting. + Show Spoiler + If you want to regain trust with a Mod you don't get along with, don't post a "redacted" PM on here to stir up trouble.+ Show Spoiler + PM them back and ask. If you are not comfortable with them PM another mod and ask their advice. Also, why would a Mod not like you? Is it a right wing conspiracy? Or perhaps are you at fault, I'm sure there are Mods that don't like me, that is because I have created frustrating work for them, not because of poor me.


This is an example of something I would consider ambiguous "direct questions" it's unclear to me whether I'm required to respond to or not? For which I don't know what else to do but ask for clarification.


There is nothing for you to respond too, just a suggestion that, you look at all the "fights" you have had. The two you mentioned, the one with P6, the one with me, the one with the Mod or Mod's, the one with Velr, the Blazer with Dave, and all the other ones I don't know about.

And reflect on, wow I sure get into a lot of these, perhaps there is something I am doing that is creating this situation. Take some responsibility and decide, do I want to keep having these and keep behaving like this or not. If you do, that is completely fine with me. But then stop coming into this thread like some Martyr or victim and just deal with all the people you are condescending too and then get in fights with you.

Completely up to you. And as I mentioned to Brian if you wish to stop talking about it, stop talking about it.

And no, this is not me calling the kettle black, I am OK to continue to talk about it. I have through PM with those who said they didnt want to publicly. And other than Brian it went quite well. If you would prefer to discuss there, I'm fine, prefer on here that is good too, prefer not to, that is great too. Just don't say you don't want to discuss it, don't like drama, and then continue to discuss it.


It's directed at me, there are question marks and I don't want to risk it. I think you literally saying I'm not supposed to answer the questions should cover me though, so ty.

If people are emboldening you in PM and not publicly I don't think it's with your best interests in their minds imo, but do you.



I am literally saying you are in control of your answers so answer what you want but think about it. All these PM's where you say it was the other guy, but you got banned, maybe them too. Consider that perhaps you are not a innocent victim and maybe not even the perpetrator, but perhaps a equal contributor. And that you seem to be the guy with the most of these situations, so how could you be contributing to it.


Shit. Are you saying those are direct questions, not rhetorical?

One of my bans I was cited admitting fault as part of the reason I was banned so... Yeah, I've considered it lol:

Yes, JimmiC posted something stupid and insensitive. He went too far. But you also admitted that you weren't completely free of fault either...



Yes I'm very aware of that, that was when you got banned because you submitted our PM's to the Mods in an attempt to get me banned and it ended up with us BOTH banned for BOTH being jerks.

Unlike you I understand when I have been a jerk and am not arguing that I am not, or have not been one. I'm pointing arguing that you are not a victim of me or moderation, but rather a victim of your own behavior.



The thing is, I got permed, one of the legitimate critiques that came with it was my jerkiness. I argued it was a reflection from particular posters. Some mods/posters agreed more or less, some didn't. Regardless, since I've returned I've tried desperately not to reflect the vitriol I (in some ways earned) from various posters. This is clear to anyone with any familiarity of me when I was at my worst. As well as take responsibility for my role in conflicts. What I think an increasing number of people are coming around to, is that with you in particular, that doesn't seem to be helping at all. Others I've previously had conflicts with (brian for example) see this all rather clearly.

I'm not saying this to embarrass you or win an argument but to sincerely try to demonstrate what I consider fruitful dialogue and do my part to invite you to join in.



It is all good, like I said all along I'm not out to get you, I just don't understand your logic. I don't believe p6, the mod or even Zeflin was out to get you either.


I'm aware. Each had unique circumstances but the general thread for at least you and P6 imo is the incongruity between my argument and your worldview and it's a lot easier to attack my position than it is to reconfigure your worldview (let alone deal with the fallout of that).

You may say "back at ya" or something but the thing is it's not the same at all because my political position isn't popular, hegemonic or even one I thought worth considering until I really thought critically about it all during Obama's 2nd term. It's not like you used to be a well-versed communist and struggled through the worldview remodeling it would take to be where you are now.

To me it is logically in-congruent to say revolution requires small arms, those in power won't give up power anyway but through violence and will respond violently, so we must have a violent revolution.

And then say when you bring up the revolution you are not advocating for a violent revolution when you also believe that it is inevitable.


I don't think a single person here doesn't know that's at least one of your ongoing issues with my positions.

To me if you advocate for something that leads to a inevitable conclusion, then you are advocating for the inevitable conclusion. I'm OK with that part, I think it is interesting to discuss why you think it inevitable, or impossible to change otherwise. I'm also interested in discussing if the cost of the inevitability is worth the result, and how you make sure that the result is as intended because there is such a high cost.


You're free to think all of that/have those opinions.

What I am not interested is skipping the entire important middle part if you believe the start leads to an inevitable outcome.

So to me if you want regime change and not revolution, that is possible without violence, at least not a outright war. But it requires time, education, getting a incredible amount of people on board. It was not that long ago when people thought throwing a apple or grass in the landfill was fine because it was going into the ground. It has taken a long time to get some of the population to understand how the lack of oxygen, pressure, all the "stuff" it is around creates methane gas and leachate. This is why there are many organic programs popping up in various cities and businesses. It is not happening as fast as I would like, it is not happening everywhere. But it is happening without violence, and with much fewer negative consequences then if we forced it on everyone after a revolution involving small arms.


+ Show Spoiler +
Honestly this seems to have shifted into a semantic argument and you repeating an argument about being optimistic about programs I've demonstrated are wholly inadequate and largely incapable of being scaled to a degree/in a time frame to make them of much value.
But if you want to argue that part, that's for another thread.

EDIT: I think fildun deserves a response to his direct question though. Which I'd gather from this post is "no I don't think it's a mischaracterization", which then makes me wonder about the Israel thing, and others.
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
Jealous
Profile Blog Joined December 2011
10138 Posts
July 25 2019 16:41 GMT
#5018
I only lurk in the thread and thus I probably pay more sparse and less intimate attention to the discourse, and also tune out shitfests to an extent, so the following may be inaccurate and if it is then I apologize in advance.

In the thread, GH made a post that was along the lines of "We need a revolution," but when probed about how this revolution would go or what it was meant to achieve, he made a post that was along the lines of "It's not up to me to explain and coordinate a revolution."

Did I understand this right? I can go back and pull the quotes if needed.

At that point, as a silent observer, I was done with reading what he has to say about revolution. It's just hot air. How are you going to take a position that has a future-facing objective but not provide any reasoning for how that objective could be achieved and why?

This doesn't work in any context. "We should throw a party," says GH. "Okay, how are we going to get supplies for the party? Who is going to buy the keg, whose house are we doing it at?" is the logical response. "Oh, it's not up to me to plan the party." Well, that was a load of wasted time discussing parties, wasn't it? "We should get a dog." "Who is going to walk it?" "Oh, it's not up to me to discuss the details of dog ownership - I just want you to disprove that we should get a dog."

Thus, I can see how it is infernally frustrating to deal with someone who (seemingly) zealously believes in something, but isn't interested in discussing why they believe in it. It's a waste of time to argue against a position that hasn't been adequately defended, and it is almost arrogant to expect others to overlook this and address the vague idea without specifics provided.

For example, if GH offered one cause-effect-resolution argument, people could actually explain why a revolution isn't necessary, or agree that it is necessary, regardless of the nature of said revolution. A possible example is

Cause: The wealth gap is growing and this has been proven to have a direct correlation to standards of healthcare, so poor people are receiving worse health care when they need it most.
Effect: Poor people are incentivized to revolt against the status quo.
Resolution: A revolution, once having toppled the standing government, can change regulations on income and wealth disparity through taxation, and systematically improve the distribution of good medical practitioners and organizations while allowing free healthcare to all.

In response, someone could argue that these things are achievable through other means. As JimmiC said above, education would be one of them, incentivizing the development of healthcare systems in underprivileged neighborhoods, voting for the direct attribution of tax funds into medical technology that would overcome the shortage of accessible healthcare in poor areas of the country, put limitations on health insurance minimums and increase minimum coverage standards legally, so on and so forth.

This is a possible discussion that at least I would be interested in having. However, missing the talking points, what is there to even talk about?

"We need a revolution."
"I don't think so. How would a revolution achieve desirable changes?"
"It's not up to me to plan the details of a revolution."
"Oh, well it's not up to me to explain why we don't need a revolution that doesn't have a plan."
"The right to vote is only the oar of the slaveship, I wanna be free." -- бум бум сучка!
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23202 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-07-25 16:52:27
July 25 2019 16:51 GMT
#5019
On July 26 2019 01:41 Jealous wrote:
I only lurk in the thread and thus I probably pay more sparse and less intimate attention to the discourse, and also tune out shitfests to an extent, so the following may be inaccurate and if it is then I apologize in advance.

In the thread, GH made a post that was along the lines of "We need a revolution," but when probed about how this revolution would go or what it was meant to achieve, he made a post that was along the lines of "It's not up to me to explain and coordinate a revolution."

Did I understand this right? I can go back and pull the quotes if needed.

At that point, as a silent observer, I was done with reading what he has to say about revolution. It's just hot air. How are you going to take a position that has a future-facing objective but not provide any reasoning for how that objective could be achieved and why?

This doesn't work in any context. "We should throw a party," says GH. "Okay, how are we going to get supplies for the party? Who is going to buy the keg, whose house are we doing it at?" is the logical response. "Oh, it's not up to me to plan the party." Well, that was a load of wasted time discussing parties, wasn't it? "We should get a dog." "Who is going to walk it?" "Oh, it's not up to me to discuss the details of dog ownership - I just want you to disprove that we should get a dog."

Thus, I can see how it is infernally frustrating to deal with someone who (seemingly) zealously believes in something, but isn't interested in discussing why they believe in it. It's a waste of time to argue against a position that hasn't been adequately defended, and it is almost arrogant to expect others to overlook this and address the vague idea without specifics provided.

For example, if GH offered one cause-effect-resolution argument, people could actually explain why a revolution isn't necessary, or agree that it is necessary, regardless of the nature of said revolution. A possible example is

Cause: The wealth gap is growing and this has been proven to have a direct correlation to standards of healthcare, so poor people are receiving worse health care when they need it most.
Effect: Poor people are incentivized to revolt against the status quo.
Resolution: A revolution, once having toppled the standing government, can change regulations on income and wealth disparity through taxation, and systematically improve the distribution of good medical practitioners and organizations while allowing free healthcare to all.

In response, someone could argue that these things are achievable through other means. As JimmiC said above, education would be one of them, incentivizing the development of healthcare systems in underprivileged neighborhoods, voting for the direct attribution of tax funds into medical technology that would overcome the shortage of accessible healthcare in poor areas of the country, put limitations on health insurance minimums and increase minimum coverage standards legally, so on and so forth.

This is a possible discussion that at least I would be interested in having. However, missing the talking points, what is there to even talk about?

"We need a revolution."
"I don't think so. How would a revolution achieve desirable changes?"
"It's not up to me to plan the details of a revolution."
"Oh, well it's not up to me to explain why we don't need a revolution that doesn't have a plan."


Lot there but let me be brief.

If I say "we should throw a party" and you look at me to do everything I'm gunna look at you like you're a dick. "I said we", if you're agreeing that's all of us and if you prefer your personal comfort at home or don't want to help, you aren't part of "we" and I'm probably not inviting you.

Same thing if I say "we should get a dog" and you agree then expect me to do all of the work while you only want enjoyment and 0 responsibility.

I'm 100% willing to discuss details, but "discuss" isn't "put my ideas up to be shit on by counterrevolutionaries who by and large lack a ( or haven't demonstrated) familiarity with the theoretical underpinnings and historical context resulting in questions and demands that are indicative not of inquiry but inquisition".
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
Jealous
Profile Blog Joined December 2011
10138 Posts
Last Edited: 2019-07-25 17:03:36
July 25 2019 17:02 GMT
#5020
On July 26 2019 01:51 GreenHorizons wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 26 2019 01:41 Jealous wrote:
I only lurk in the thread and thus I probably pay more sparse and less intimate attention to the discourse, and also tune out shitfests to an extent, so the following may be inaccurate and if it is then I apologize in advance.

In the thread, GH made a post that was along the lines of "We need a revolution," but when probed about how this revolution would go or what it was meant to achieve, he made a post that was along the lines of "It's not up to me to explain and coordinate a revolution."

Did I understand this right? I can go back and pull the quotes if needed.

At that point, as a silent observer, I was done with reading what he has to say about revolution. It's just hot air. How are you going to take a position that has a future-facing objective but not provide any reasoning for how that objective could be achieved and why?

This doesn't work in any context. "We should throw a party," says GH. "Okay, how are we going to get supplies for the party? Who is going to buy the keg, whose house are we doing it at?" is the logical response. "Oh, it's not up to me to plan the party." Well, that was a load of wasted time discussing parties, wasn't it? "We should get a dog." "Who is going to walk it?" "Oh, it's not up to me to discuss the details of dog ownership - I just want you to disprove that we should get a dog."

Thus, I can see how it is infernally frustrating to deal with someone who (seemingly) zealously believes in something, but isn't interested in discussing why they believe in it. It's a waste of time to argue against a position that hasn't been adequately defended, and it is almost arrogant to expect others to overlook this and address the vague idea without specifics provided.

For example, if GH offered one cause-effect-resolution argument, people could actually explain why a revolution isn't necessary, or agree that it is necessary, regardless of the nature of said revolution. A possible example is

Cause: The wealth gap is growing and this has been proven to have a direct correlation to standards of healthcare, so poor people are receiving worse health care when they need it most.
Effect: Poor people are incentivized to revolt against the status quo.
Resolution: A revolution, once having toppled the standing government, can change regulations on income and wealth disparity through taxation, and systematically improve the distribution of good medical practitioners and organizations while allowing free healthcare to all.

In response, someone could argue that these things are achievable through other means. As JimmiC said above, education would be one of them, incentivizing the development of healthcare systems in underprivileged neighborhoods, voting for the direct attribution of tax funds into medical technology that would overcome the shortage of accessible healthcare in poor areas of the country, put limitations on health insurance minimums and increase minimum coverage standards legally, so on and so forth.

This is a possible discussion that at least I would be interested in having. However, missing the talking points, what is there to even talk about?

"We need a revolution."
"I don't think so. How would a revolution achieve desirable changes?"
"It's not up to me to plan the details of a revolution."
"Oh, well it's not up to me to explain why we don't need a revolution that doesn't have a plan."


Lot there but let me be brief.

If I say "we should throw a party" and you look at me to do everything I'm gunna look at you like you're a dick. "I said we", if you're agreeing that's all of us and if you prefer your personal comfort at home or don't want to help, you aren't part of "we" and I'm probably not inviting you.

Same thing if I say "we should get a dog" and you agree then expect me to do all of the work while you only want enjoyment and 0 responsibility.

I'm 100% willing to discuss details, but "discuss" isn't "put my ideas up to be shit on by counterrevolutionaries who by and large lack a ( or haven't demonstrated) familiarity with the theoretical underpinnings and historical context resulting in questions and demands that are indicative not of inquiry but inquisition".

I think you misunderstood my analogies as it demanding that you actually DO all of the things required to throw a party or own a dog. I refuse to believe that you think I am demanding that you actually START a revolution based on how you interpreted my analogy.

The aim was to show that just throwing an idea out there with no support at all doesn't achieve anything. We are still at the planning stage here, not at the actual task distribution stage. In the planning stage, as a person who is seemingly interested in throwing a party, the onus is on you to express your desires in a constructive way.

I can completely sympathize with the fact that you don't want to put in hours of work to flesh out your position (although, to be fair, you seem to be putting in hours of work to defend your right to not flesh it out) only to have someone respond with "lol what a dumb idea," but why not take it piecemeal? How about the example I provided? That took me a few minutes at most to put together for the sake of a hypothetical position you could take.

Also, I can now first hand see what other people mean by condescension. Why even talk about revolution if your initial position is that your opponents are unqualified to talk about revolution, and only you are?
"The right to vote is only the oar of the slaveship, I wanna be free." -- бум бум сучка!
Prev 1 249 250 251 252 253 322 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 7h 42m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft: Brood War
Britney 46348
Sea 1277
GuemChi 573
Larva 508
zelot 205
PianO 159
Sharp 93
ToSsGirL 64
BeSt 49
Sacsri 40
[ Show more ]
NaDa 40
JulyZerg 34
Bale 11
Shine 10
Hm[arnc] 10
Dota 2
XcaliburYe472
ODPixel359
XaKoH 235
Counter-Strike
Stewie2K1155
shoxiejesuss651
Super Smash Bros
Mew2King194
Other Games
gofns7934
ceh9314
SortOf120
Trikslyr23
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick3021
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 15 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Berry_CruncH395
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• iopq 6
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
Dota 2
• lizZardDota2176
League of Legends
• Stunt826
• HappyZerGling84
Upcoming Events
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
7h 42m
Replay Cast
15h 42m
The PondCast
1d 1h
OSC
1d 4h
WardiTV European League
1d 7h
Replay Cast
1d 15h
Epic.LAN
2 days
CranKy Ducklings
3 days
Epic.LAN
3 days
CSO Contender
3 days
[ Show More ]
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
3 days
Bonyth vs Sziky
Dewalt vs Hawk
Hawk vs QiaoGege
Sziky vs Dewalt
Mihu vs Bonyth
Zhanhun vs QiaoGege
QiaoGege vs Fengzi
Sparkling Tuna Cup
4 days
Online Event
4 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
4 days
Bonyth vs Zhanhun
Dewalt vs Mihu
Hawk vs Sziky
Sziky vs QiaoGege
Mihu vs Hawk
Zhanhun vs Dewalt
Fengzi vs Bonyth
Esports World Cup
6 days
ByuN vs Astrea
Lambo vs HeRoMaRinE
Clem vs TBD
Solar vs Zoun
SHIN vs Reynor
Maru vs TriGGeR
herO vs Lancer
Cure vs ShoWTimE
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSL 17: 2025 SUMMER
RSL Revival: Season 1
Murky Cup #2

Ongoing

JPL Season 2
BSL 2v2 Season 3
Copa Latinoamericana 4
Jiahua Invitational
BSL20 Non-Korean Championship
Championship of Russia 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25
BLAST Rivals Spring 2025
MESA Nomadic Masters

Upcoming

CSL Xiamen Invitational
CSL Xiamen Invitational: ShowMatche
2025 ACS Season 2
CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
BSL Season 21
K-Championship
RSL Revival: Season 2
SEL Season 2 Championship
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
FEL Cracov 2025
Esports World Cup 2025
Underdog Cup #2
ESL Pro League S22
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.