|
On June 12 2017 03:17 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On June 11 2017 17:17 Acrofales wrote:On June 11 2017 07:15 ChristianS wrote:
If the haters are just making fun of how you talk, then yeah, fuck the haters. If he wants to try to improve his posting style that's great and I support that, but this shit is just to try to make him feel bad about who he is, which is fucked up.
Here's basically how this went to me - if anybody feels their contribution is being misrepresented feel free to argue how my characterization is incorrect.
IgnE: zlefin I think you're mentally handicapped and you post dumb because you're mentally handicapped (gets banned)
Intro: lol gj IgnE
Farva: yeah lol that's totally zlefin
GH: I don't agree with Intro on anything but this
LL: *mimics zlefin* hey I'm zlefin look how dumb I am
Me: zlefin people are being dicks, don't worry about them
Out of that set of responses, I'm the one shitting up the thread? I think you fundamentally missed IgnE's point. But I guess that's Poe's law in action. While IgnE clearly crossed the line, he wasn't seriously calling zlefin a retarded, he was making a rhetorical point about zlefin calling Trump a retard. Furthermore, he was throwing zlefins retorts about unsound reasoning straight back in his face. You can accuse IgnE of being an asshole, but not of not being rather clever about it. And Intro, Farva, GH and LL got that point and apparently thought it was quite witty (I did), despite breaking forum rules. why you gotta strawman? i didn't call trump a retard. if you're going to make a point; strawmanning the point the other guy made isn't helpful. aside from that; i'm mostly ignoring the discussion, cuz as usual, it mostly consists of haters hating; rather than making actually sound points. also, poor behavior by a mod, for mocking someone in the appeals process. note: I probably won't respond to your response, as i'm not looking into this thread much.
I almost believed you until that part. Why is it you think Igne made the comment he made?
|
There's an appeal process?
|
On June 12 2017 03:17 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On June 11 2017 17:17 Acrofales wrote:On June 11 2017 07:15 ChristianS wrote:
If the haters are just making fun of how you talk, then yeah, fuck the haters. If he wants to try to improve his posting style that's great and I support that, but this shit is just to try to make him feel bad about who he is, which is fucked up.
Here's basically how this went to me - if anybody feels their contribution is being misrepresented feel free to argue how my characterization is incorrect.
IgnE: zlefin I think you're mentally handicapped and you post dumb because you're mentally handicapped (gets banned)
Intro: lol gj IgnE
Farva: yeah lol that's totally zlefin
GH: I don't agree with Intro on anything but this
LL: *mimics zlefin* hey I'm zlefin look how dumb I am
Me: zlefin people are being dicks, don't worry about them
Out of that set of responses, I'm the one shitting up the thread? I think you fundamentally missed IgnE's point. But I guess that's Poe's law in action. While IgnE clearly crossed the line, he wasn't seriously calling zlefin a retarded, he was making a rhetorical point about zlefin calling Trump a retard. Furthermore, he was throwing zlefins retorts about unsound reasoning straight back in his face. You can accuse IgnE of being an asshole, but not of not being rather clever about it. And Intro, Farva, GH and LL got that point and apparently thought it was quite witty (I did), despite breaking forum rules. why you gotta strawman? i didn't call trump a retard. if you're going to make a point; strawmanning the point the other guy made isn't helpful. aside from that; i'm mostly ignoring the discussion, cuz as usual, it mostly consists of haters hating; rather than making actually sound points. also, poor behavior by a mod, for mocking someone in the appeals process. note: I probably won't respond to your response, as i'm not looking into this thread much.
You're right, of course. You never called Trump retarded. You called him "mentally ill". IgnE was far better at mirroring your writing than I am. Hence why he didn't call you retarded, but only mentally ill too.
That was a yuuuuge strawman indeed. Let the haters hate!
|
To be fair, there are signs that Trump is mentally ill, to put it politely.
|
Arguing the 25th Amendment should be used for personality disorders known before assuming office ... is another form of mental illness. It's a polite way of saying you want to invalidate your fellow citizen's votes for political reasons, but that line of reasoning is probably best left for the main thread. I don't know if zlefin the poster is worth IgnE's banned blaze-of-glory point; but the topic of dreamed do-over elections and 25th amendment removals, also with the assassination make-believe plays, is bubbling beneath the surface.
|
unsurprisingly; the congressional shooting brought out shitposts by the usual suspects. it's tiresome having to listen to them repeat lies that have been disproven over and over. hopefully one of them will get a timeban at least.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
Looks fine to me, everyone is fairly mellow. Your claim is unsound.
|
Zlefin you're a thread treasure, no doubt about it. Never leave.
|
ugh, sermo keeps repeating a point that's been thoroughly disproven, and which simply doesn't remotely hold up at all. very tiresome, thoug not really actionable. but utterly useless for the thread and merely increases toxicity by having to listen to someone spout something provably false over and over.
it's like arguing with a brick wall, he's just utterly ignoring all the points actually made, or completely failing to understand them.
|
United States42009 Posts
On June 17 2017 11:50 zlefin wrote:
ugh, sermo keeps repeating a point that's been thoroughly disproven, and which simply doesn't remotely hold up at all. very tiresome, thoug not really actionable. but utterly useless for the thread and merely increases toxicity by having to listen to someone spout something provably false over and over.
it's like arguing with a brick wall, he's just utterly ignoring all the points actually made, or completely failing to understand them.
Is that an ultimatum?!
|
It's not useless for folks to see the lengths some go in order to defend the police. Much of what sermo said stands as commonplace justificationism.
|
On June 17 2017 12:12 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2017 12:09 Sermokala wrote:On June 17 2017 11:55 zlefin wrote:
sermo ->
try this,
start from the premise: what the officer did was wrong, and should be punished.
Now see that he was not punished.
part of your problem is your COMKPLETELY ignoring our point that the officer should be punished; and holding it to be an incontrovertible fact that what the officer did is proper, despite their being ample room for the contrary viewpoint (especially considering there are numerous countries in the world where the officer would be convicted for what he did).
and I say you're advocating making the system worse because you are. holding people accountable is a basic function of society. you are advocating NOT holding people accountable. you are giving an officer free reign to kill anyone for a pathetically low standard of evidence; which it should be noted, if any regular citizen did, they would be convicted of murder.
ask yourself this: if it were a regular citizen doing the shooting, and not a cop, would he have been convicted of murder? and should he have been convicted of murder? What the officer did was wrong. Why did the officer do a wrong thing? Should we hold that person accountable for doing that wrong thing? Thats called seeing if the person is guilty of a crime or not. Thats called deciding if it was murder or just killing someone. Its called Justice. You want the person to be punished I want Justice. So we want different things I guess. Holding people acountable for their crimes doesn't make sense when they make that crime under a broken system. You would rail against the drug war and be on my side on this issue. A regular citizen wouldn't have made a traffic stop and wouldn't have a reasonable fear for their life. Police arn't regular citizens we give them a badge and a gun and except everything to be fine and them not to make mistakes or care about their lives now? //I'm right you're wrong shame on you, stop wastin gthe threads tim with your nonsense. You are not arguing, since you are ignoring the points we make and simply restating your own, no matter how thoroughly they have been countered.
I've tried to be reasonable, but you are persisting in being unreasonable.//You're wrong
I'm guessing your goal here is to prove somebody else is arguing in a shitty manner by arguing in a shitty manner.
And throwing in a "shame on you" for gratuitous and productive shaming!
[/sarcasm]
|
danglars shit posting both here (my remarks were factually true, and called sermo out only after sermo failed in all the mentioned ways), and in the thread yet again. can we just ban him already? I mean, unlike xdaunt, who's a troll, at least xdaunt is capable of basic argumentation; danglars can't even get his own thesis statements or basic arguing rgiht. so he just makes dumb points constantly, and ignores the counterarguments which prove him wrong. He really doesn't contribute anything useful to the thread; at least xdaunt has some useful and well thought out points at times. danglars really doesn't add anything, and just degrades the thread.
I expect people to at least be able to engagte in very basic argumentation; or make good points now and then; or be willing to listen. otherwise having idiots spout nonsense over and over when they don't listen or learn anything, or teach anybody anything other than how much some people are idiots, isn't helpful.
|
On June 21 2017 06:56 zlefin wrote:
danglars shit posting both here (my remarks were factually true, and called sermo out only after sermo failed in all the mentioned ways), and in the thread yet again. can we just ban him already? I mean, unlike xdaunt, who's a troll, at least xdaunt is capable of basic argumentation; danglars can't even get his own thesis statements or basic arguing rgiht. so he just makes dumb points constantly, and ignores the counterarguments which prove him wrong. He really doesn't contribute anything useful to the thread; at least xdaunt has some useful and well thought out points at times. danglars really doesn't add anything, and just degrades the thread.
I expect people to at least be able to engagte in very basic argumentation; or make good points now and then; or be willing to listen. otherwise having idiots spout nonsense over and over when they don't listen or learn anything, or teach anybody anything other than how much some people are idiots, isn't helpful.
Because you never provide any evidence to your points and always go straight to shitpost on the users that you claim that are shitposting.
|
|
|
impressive shitposting by danglars two days ago; spends half the day talking about how some study proves this and that; despite numerous requests from numerous people, never actually cites/links to/even names the underlying study, and dodges the issue of ever backing up his claims.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
Seriously, how many "Danglars trolling - annoying!" posts do we need in here?
|
|
|
I was waiting with baited breath for this post.
|
Norway28561 Posts
ghostcom's posts are fine. He's a medical professional who takes offense at people who have no medical backgrounds (or anyone, probably) trying to evaluate people's mental health and possible illnesses based on media appearances. His position is as sound as can be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
