EPT
but fair enough. good luck. i’ve told myself in the past i’d leave these threads for good for the sake of my mental health but i’m not a strong enough person.
US Politics Feedback Thread - Page 303
| Forum Index > Website Feedback |
|
brian
United States9641 Posts
but fair enough. good luck. i’ve told myself in the past i’d leave these threads for good for the sake of my mental health but i’m not a strong enough person. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23899 Posts
That's what started this. I tried to politely point out what I thought had been the genesis of all this. https://tl.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread?page=301#6006 which prompted this response from you: + Show Spoiler + On July 01 2020 11:21 JimmiC wrote: I took this out of the politics thread because it didn't belong there. I would respond via PM but I would be scared of you starting a drama that I'm harassing you. I've learned it is best to put it out in the open. I was pointing out your hyperbole by picking the most obvious measurable, from 0-1. And the soap box comment was about how you were again straw manning and putting yourself above others as the morale authority on racism and politics. I had read enough of your posts to know you were full of shit. The thing is that you made it even clearer when it came to Venezuela. You spend a good 80% of your time both sidesing on the USpol and trying to point out how bad the dems are and that people are too partisan to notice. And then at the same time you, some times within minutes, are saying Maduro is is justified in shooting unarmed Indigenous people going for food because it is a coup and the US is sneaking arms in with the food. The coup never happened and yet you still believe it did. Basically if Trump's party was named the socialist party of America, you would believe all his tweets, that the capitalist class (deep state) was behind everything bad. And the protesters were not the upset people but that they are agents of the capitalist class (antifa). Heck you at one point were calling the refugee's that number in the millions part of the capitalist class. When the police killed people, it would be justified because they were agents of capitalism. (in reality the FAES killed SO many more than the US police its not even funny, but them you support https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/venezuela-violence-police-faes/) And so on, it is why it irks me when you go all Holier than thou, all the while supporting and defending some of the worst humans on the planet. If you ever held the authoritarian's that call themselves socialists despite their lack of socialist policies accountable it would at least give you the slightest bit of credibility. There is no authenticity to what you write. You still have some who believe you are a victim of others and not a victim of your continued awful behavior. You only treat a select few with any grace, people who you consider elites. Which is actually kind of fitting since the governments you support also only take care of a select few elites while blaming all their problems on others. There will be people who come and go on the US pol threads, but one thing will remain constant as it has since you started posting, you will find some one to blame for why you're being a jerk, it won't be your fault. You can try to blame me all you want, but whether I'm posting or not you find a way to get into fights. I believe the count is now at 5 (or like 9 if you count all the different people) that I have done the experiment and you have delivered. The you and Biff is a decent example but he is punching back as you are straw manning his posts and dodging his straight forward questions that thank goodness others are able to answer. So it is not as obvious as it was when you were calling Uldridge, SR18, ChistianS, Falling and so on all bad faith for asking you questions about a topic you should be a expert on, want to talk about, and you had nothing but insults and condescension. The best analogy I can give is you know how people who cheat on their partners are always accusing their partners of cheating because they do it they think everyone is doing it. This is you and arguing in bad faith. There is not a constant supply of bad faith posters on the TL politics thread. But there is a endless supply of people (for at least what 5 years?) that you accuse and insult. This would lead any unbiased person to the conclusion that you are the problem. If someone did one of those boards they show on crime TV with the strings out to each connection for every bit of drama on the USpol thread it would become extremely obvious that you were at the center and had by far the most connections often to people who sit left of you on many issues. To reiterate it is not your politics I or almost anyone else have a problem with. For the most part we don't even really know what they are past the slogans. It is how you constantly strawman to the worst possible assumption and then treat that assumption like a fact while being a complete jerk to whoever. Often disregarding entire posts while arguing one sentence minus the context that surrounds it. which spawned a whole lot more. I would argue if people just said: "Yeah, responding like that back then was uncalled for JimmiC" a lot of this could be avoided, but we're still at the point where either people don't agree with that or didn't speak up to it directly. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12449 Posts
On July 02 2020 04:43 brian wrote: i’ve told myself in the past i’d leave these threads for good for the sake of my mental health but i’m not a strong enough person. That's a large part of how I ended up banning myself fwiw | ||
tofucake
Hyrule19205 Posts
On July 02 2020 03:29 GreenHorizons wrote: If mods ever wanted to go through my ban history I can assure you most of the actions come from responding to posts like Biff's or xDaunt's racism isn't a serious problem worth our attention type posts. False. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23899 Posts
Doesn't seem productive at this point to go through them. But if you're offering, I suppose we could? I just don't want to leave this allegation hanging. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
| ||
Seeker
Where dat snitch at?37072 Posts
| ||
BigFan
TLADT24920 Posts
On July 02 2020 02:27 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote: I'm the same way. Then when you get to a red text after a post, you have to go back and see what the lead up to it was. I'd appreciate if a mod besides Drone, Falling, KwarK or Seeker could chime in with what they've been seeing in the thread recently, to get an "outsiders" point of view. I mean, if we're all mistaken in our critiques of each other's posting, I'd like to know. I haven't followed the thread recently since I take breaks from it. One thing I can say is that Biff's post was unacceptable due to the flaming. If he took a minute to reread it and edited out any part that's insulting, he probably wouldn't have been actioned. As for GH, reading some posts here, I came to the realization that there's a good chance that either he doesn't know how to articulate his points at all, doesn't feel like it or funny enough, he probably doesn't know what he even wants which is why he'll dodge some questions while answering others lol. Other than that, I can't say much since I haven't followed the thread recently. Absolutely false indeed. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23899 Posts
On July 02 2020 12:52 Danglars wrote: Give it a rest, my god Reminds me of when people talked about my PM's, but never showed them publicly, because they weren't being honest about them. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France8072 Posts
On July 03 2020 03:41 BigFan wrote: I haven't followed the thread recently since I take breaks from it. One thing I can say is that Biff's post was unacceptable due to the flaming. If he took a minute to reread it and edited out any part that's insulting, he probably wouldn't have been actioned. As for GH, reading some posts here, I came to the realization that there's a good chance that either he doesn't know how to articulate his points at all, doesn't feel like it or funny enough, he probably doesn't know what he even wants which is why he'll dodge some questions while answering others lol. Other than that, I can't say much since I haven't followed the thread recently. Absolutely false indeed. Yeah I snapped. My bad. I deserved my ban and accepted it in good grace. I think that after having been told that my arguments compared to incels wanting to know how they could rape women, being compared to a grave digger, suffering multiple insinuations of racism and then told to shut up because I am a white guy - all of that without even starting to try to answer my points - the fact that he got the iron, pinneaple size balls to say that I didn't come here to discuss in good faith kind of pissed me off beyond the point of caring for a ban. I just have no stomach for this behaviour. I am not used to be talked to like that and don't intend to start. I know that in an ideal world, we should just ignore GH. And I remember Drone saying that it was beyond him why we didn't. The problem is that when someone is constantly attacking your honour in such a vicious way, you have to defend yourself. I regret breaking the rules - especially for someone like GH. I came to the conclusion that he has issues, and that's not really my problem. That being said, I hope that in the future, the content of his smears, insinuations, insults and plain defamation gets looked into behind the vernis of "argumentation" he hides them under. Because they are way more unacceptable, in my opinion, that being told that you argue like a fucking douchebag. | ||
|
Artisreal
Germany9235 Posts
| ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France8072 Posts
On July 03 2020 22:17 Artisreal wrote: To me it feels like that you have not reflected on my post reiterating why this parallel to incels and corporations was drawn. I have. I find it quite insulting and totally unfair. At the very best it's accusing me of being totally disingenuous, with a rather distasteful comparison. Asking for specific rules always reminds me of incels and companies prying to find a way around regulations. The quote in question. I ask for the concept to be a bit more specific because, to me, it's awfully vague and inevitably leads to rather absurd consequences if followed through, and - correct me if I am mistaken - I am being told that my need for clarification is malicious, similarly to incels trying to assault women without getting caught. My need for clarification spawns from the fact that my whole field is a giant cluster of cultural appropriations - and I would like to understand why the concept suddenly doesn't apply to classical music. I am not trying to pry around anything. But again I am cool with that. I assume that's a misunderstanding between us with no intention from you of insulting me. I'm certain it's not in GH case. | ||
|
ChristianS
United States3304 Posts
I think both are valuable, but the first is mostly a binary where the second is a virtue to aspire to. He might clarify and say I’m wrong here, but I think when he says someone isn’t approaching something in good faith he’s more accusing them of being closed-minded, not saying they’re insincere. I don’t know if that distinction would make anyone more or less offended by it, but it’s probably worth clarifying what’s being claimed. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23899 Posts
On July 04 2020 01:38 ChristianS wrote: I think maybe GH uses “good faith” differently than I do. I think of it as meaning “you actually believe what you’re arguing.” I get the impression he uses it for fuzzier qualities - genuine interest in getting a better understanding of others’ point of view, approaching opposing arguments with an interrogative tone, keeping an open mind to revising your understanding, etc. I think both are valuable, but the first is mostly a binary where the second is a virtue to aspire to. He might clarify and say I’m wrong here, but I think when he says someone isn’t approaching something in good faith he’s more accusing them of being closed-minded, not saying they’re insincere. I don’t know if that distinction would make anyone more or less offended by it, but it’s probably worth clarifying what’s being claimed. The first allows someone like Trump to be classified as 'good faith' when he says "covid will magically go away" because he believes it when he says it. The second would identify that as not a good faith argument. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Artisreal
Germany9235 Posts
On July 03 2020 22:24 Biff The Understudy wrote: I have. I find it quite insulting and totally unfair. At the very best it's accusing me of being totally disingenuous, with a rather distasteful comparison. The quote in question. I ask for the concept to be a bit more specific because, to me, it's awfully vague and inevitably leads to rather absurd consequences if followed through, and - correct me if I am mistaken - I am being told that my need for clarification is malicious, similarly to incels trying to assault women without getting caught. My need for clarification spawns from the fact that my whole field is a giant cluster of cultural appropriations - and I would like to understand why the concept suddenly doesn't apply to classical music. I am not trying to pry around anything. But again I am cool with that. I assume that's a misunderstanding between us with no intention from you of insulting me. I'm certain it's not in GH case. I think I can relate where you're coming from with the question. And I, personally, appreciate if people ask for more information with which they can guide their footsteps through a maze full of traps - more related to where I work of course, as I've got little personal experience with racism ( only ever been treated better in a place because I was the exotic white guy). It might have been less crass if I had added to one of my previous posts, that these comparisons come to mind if the person asking comes about as disingenuous. That bit of context might have slipped by in the heat of the moment (even though I'm trying not to post when I'm a bit heated, sometimes it gets the better of me). | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France8072 Posts
On July 04 2020 03:10 Artisreal wrote: I think I can relate where you're coming from with the question. And I, personally, appreciate if people ask for more information with which they can guide their footsteps through a maze full of traps - more related to where I work of course, as I've got little personal experience with racism ( only ever been treated better in a place because I was the exotic white guy). It might have been less crass if I had added to one of my previous posts, that these comparisons come to mind if the person asking comes about as disingenuous. That bit of context might have slipped by in the heat of the moment (even though I'm trying not to post when I'm a bit heated, sometimes it gets the better of me). It's good man. I like this place because people come from incredibly different places, backgrounds and experiences. In that discussion I come as a performing artist in a field that is not really confronted with American systemic anti-black racism. That gives me a perspective that is more centered about culture and art than the racial aspect of the question, and that makes me question this concept from that perspective. I regret to have missed the Elvis discussion, because I would have had a lot to say. But I'm the one who sepukku'ed myself into a ban out of rage, so hey... | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France8072 Posts
On July 04 2020 01:38 ChristianS wrote: I think maybe GH uses “good faith” differently than I do. I think of it as meaning “you actually believe what you’re arguing.” I get the impression he uses it for fuzzier qualities - genuine interest in getting a better understanding of others’ point of view, approaching opposing arguments with an interrogative tone, keeping an open mind to revising your understanding, etc. I think both are valuable, but the first is mostly a binary where the second is a virtue to aspire to. He might clarify and say I’m wrong here, but I think when he says someone isn’t approaching something in good faith he’s more accusing them of being closed-minded, not saying they’re insincere. I don’t know if that distinction would make anyone more or less offended by it, but it’s probably worth clarifying what’s being claimed. I don't have the feeling that GH ever showed any interest in displaying a genuine interest in getting a better understanding of anyone's point of view and CERTAINLY not mine in that discussion. I invite you to reread the back and forth between us under the light of your definition, and you will probably agree with me that getting accused of bad faith in that spot by him would be enough to get anyone into a murderous rage. | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
On July 03 2020 03:41 BigFan wrote: As for GH, reading some posts here, I came to the realization that there's a good chance that either he doesn't know how to articulate his points at all, doesn't feel like it or funny enough, he probably doesn't know what he even wants which is why he'll dodge some questions while answering others lol. Other than that, I can't say much since I haven't followed the thread recently. He had absolutely no problems answering by accusing other of being in bad faith, or any problems answering back, instead prefering to send out the whip for hatred of his targets. Absolutely no problems drowning the thread in his replies, doesn't feel like answering, it is not. So what options do you think is left?______ Anyways, my thoughts. here we had a person who is a member of an symphony orchestra, actively participating in the creation of art and culture as a living. He would have a unique expert insight into the topic of culture, the chaning and mixing of culture and especially in regard to the creative effort of music. For all that, he gets to compared to an incels, compared with racists for having the temerity to asks questions, to not bow down before GH. We get accusations that Biff is acting in bad faith, that he is not serious as if somehow discussing from the point of view of a life dedicated to the creation of culture, that being a member of a symphony orchestra entail, the years of practice needed, is not serious? if you had an artist or a pop singer or a rapper in the thread talking about musical influences would you have treated them that way? Judging from the thread yes. And why does that happen? Simply because GH is ill-equipped to answer those questions himself. It's easy is it not? You cannot answer, so you call the other person bad faith, and there are plenty of people in thread on your "side" so they can join in the bullying too. Here's the thing. The US politics thread is supposed to be to discuss politics. To share thoughts and points of views. it is not supposed to be about your "side" whatever it may be. It's not supposed to be about how much you hate the republican party, or hate the democrat party, or owning the libs or whatever political group/person you hate. Whether Trump or Hilary Clinton or Obama or whoever. It's not supposed to be a mud slinging match where you pile onto another person for not being on your side. You are supposed to act in good faith. If you genuinely beleive marriage is a sacred Christian tradition, just go out and say it for example. I treat questions asking for my thoughts as an opportunity to expouse my thoughts and point of views, but all too often when the answer is "I don't know" or "I don't know how to think or articulate" or "I don't want to reveal my point of view", for others it becomes dodges, accusations and sending out the whip to get others to contribute in your stead. Don't you feel embarrassed when you can't intellectually stand on your own two legs and make appeals to those of the position, to declare that someone else is on your side? Don't you people feel embarrassed everytime when you say that you will pass the question onto somebody else? Don't you feel a sense of contradiction everytime you appreciate those people are contributing to what you yourself are doing in that case? Or is it simply the expeience of comfort of being on a side that smothers all critical thinking like a comforting blanket of hatred as a response? USA political system may be partisan and tribalistic. The US politics thread needs not be this way. | ||
|
brian
United States9641 Posts
| ||
| ||
