|
On September 19 2017 11:25 zlefin wrote:as usual, much of the threads comes from trolling/factually false nonsense; and from people trying to counter that nonsense, with danglars at the center of an awful lot of it. here's this little gem: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/general/383301-us-politics-mega-thread?page=8769#175363talk about an unjustified comparison! and he's doubling down on it in the thread. boooo! will danglars ever get actioned as he deserves? he's been dragging the thread down for a long while now. half the thread knows he argues in bad faith constantly, yet the mods refuse to take action against someone that is known to argue in bad faith constantly.
Mob justice and evict the thread conservatives!
Yes I know their skin color and ideology was wrong, but I don't think anyone, young or old, black or white, should feel threatened coming to a school. If you think civil rights should be protected by police action based on the color of your skin, this was a sad day.
|
I don't really see the problem. It's a poor analogy but it wasn't like Danglars entire premise was "Ben Shapiro is the same as the Little Rock 9", it wasn't a large part of the post. At best it was "there are similarities to their situations". I think it's a poor analogy because restricted free speech doesn't come anywhere close to segregation on the scale of things, but it's not really worth debating.
|
Why don't you just report his post and call it a day?
|
On September 19 2017 12:15 LegalLord wrote:
Why don't you just report his post and call it a day?
zlefin's report ability was stripped due to ... questionable choices of reports
|
On September 19 2017 12:17 Nevuk wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2017 12:15 LegalLord wrote:
Why don't you just report his post and call it a day? zlefin's report ability was stripped due to ... questionable choices.
So what you're saying is that he chose... poorly?
|
On September 19 2017 12:14 Nevuk wrote:
I don't really see the problem. It's a poor analogy but it wasn't like Danglars entire premise was "Ben Shapiro is the same as the Little Rock 9", it wasn't a large part of the post. At best it was "there are similarities to their situations". I think it's a poor analogy because restricted free speech doesn't come anywhere close to segregation on the scale of things, but it's not really worth debating.
I might as well have said they were exactly the same for how they took it.
I guess pick what you're offended at and pack up your bags in a huff.
|
On September 19 2017 11:31 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2017 11:25 zlefin wrote:as usual, much of the threads comes from trolling/factually false nonsense; and from people trying to counter that nonsense, with danglars at the center of an awful lot of it. here's this little gem: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/general/383301-us-politics-mega-thread?page=8769#175363talk about an unjustified comparison! and he's doubling down on it in the thread. boooo! will danglars ever get actioned as he deserves? he's been dragging the thread down for a long while now. half the thread knows he argues in bad faith constantly, yet the mods refuse to take action against someone that is known to argue in bad faith constantly. Mob justice and evict the thread conservatives! Yes I know their skin color and ideology was wrong, but I don't think anyone, young or old, black or white, should feel threatened coming to a school. If you think civil rights should be protected by police action based on the color of your skin, this was a sad day.
Personally I don't want you evicted, I just want people to know the pattern of white supremacy they see in many of your and/or xDaunt's posts isn't coincidence, it's there and consistent. Once you recognize it, it becomes a lot easier to see it before it gets as overt as a dozen pages defending Nazi's right to advocate for genocide (with police protecting them on the tax dollars dime without any concern about the cost) and another dozen on the very dangerous slippery slope of shrouding statues in an effort to draw attention to the fact that they have been deified without consideration for the despicable things they did/advocated.
|
Responding with such vehemence to Danglars' posting is what we call a tell. Danglars is eminently reasonable when he posts and has a tendency to really put some time and effort into his arguments. Politics aside, he's one of the least objectionable posters in the thread. As far as I am concerned, attacking him is a true sign of small mindedness.
|
Canada11459 Posts
On September 19 2017 11:25 zlefin wrote:as usual, much of the threads comes from trolling/factually false nonsense; and from people trying to counter that nonsense, with danglars at the center of an awful lot of it. here's this little gem: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/general/383301-us-politics-mega-thread?page=8769#175363talk about an unjustified comparison! and he's doubling down on it in the thread. boooo! will danglars ever get actioned as he deserves? he's been dragging the thread down for a long while now. half the thread knows he argues in bad faith constantly, yet the mods refuse to take action against someone that is known to argue in bad faith constantly.
I really don't see the problem with Danglar's post that you linked to. Maybe it's a little more fightin' words than I would use, but the price tag alone to make that event happen is pretty noteworthy. What, in that post, is arguing in bad faith? That phrase is used so often that I confess, I mostly read 'bad faith' as 'I vehemently disagree with you'.
edit.
Ah. It's specifically the Little Rock Nine reference... I don't think we typically and specifically moderate the quality of a person's comparisons.
|
On September 19 2017 12:29 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2017 11:31 Danglars wrote:On September 19 2017 11:25 zlefin wrote:as usual, much of the threads comes from trolling/factually false nonsense; and from people trying to counter that nonsense, with danglars at the center of an awful lot of it. here's this little gem: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/general/383301-us-politics-mega-thread?page=8769#175363talk about an unjustified comparison! and he's doubling down on it in the thread. boooo! will danglars ever get actioned as he deserves? he's been dragging the thread down for a long while now. half the thread knows he argues in bad faith constantly, yet the mods refuse to take action against someone that is known to argue in bad faith constantly. Mob justice and evict the thread conservatives! Yes I know their skin color and ideology was wrong, but I don't think anyone, young or old, black or white, should feel threatened coming to a school. If you think civil rights should be protected by police action based on the color of your skin, this was a sad day. Personally I don't want you evicted, I just want people to know the pattern of white supremacy they see in many of your and/or xDaunt's posts isn't coincidence, it's there and consistent. Once you recognize it, it becomes a lot easier to see it before it gets as overt as a dozen pages defending Nazi's right to advocate for genocide (with police protecting them on the tax dollars dime without any concern about the cost) and another dozen on the very dangerous slippery slope of shrouding statues in an effort to draw attention to the fact that they have been deified without consideration for the despicable things they did/advocated.
The pattern isn't coincidence. It's that defending the rights of BLM is smiled upon, and defending the rights of neonazis makes you a white supremacist. And because this left-leaning forum spends a lot of time making whites out to be the "other," it turns out that normally tame posts turn into Defcon 5 for thread leftists. And more time gets devoted to them because everybody's collective panties are up in a bunch that anyone would defend marching rights and gun rights and first amendment rights of white people that aren't gay, transgender, or journalists. I can't pick what you're all furious about. I will defend my argument if I think yours is faulty ... and I'll do it over several pages if you really want to be that repetitive and plentiful in partisan assertions (historically true).
But if it makes you sleep better at night assuming if you can spot
a clear thread of white supremacy running through the arguments of Danglars
Then have at it. I'm not going to try and get you banned or anything. Your participation is one of the longer ones and I have a fair idea of your political thought.
EDIT: I should say your perspective is of course disgusting, but it's fairly popular among a sector of the left that sees racists/neonazis/white supremacists in any group of whites.
|
On September 19 2017 13:02 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2017 12:29 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 19 2017 11:31 Danglars wrote:On September 19 2017 11:25 zlefin wrote:as usual, much of the threads comes from trolling/factually false nonsense; and from people trying to counter that nonsense, with danglars at the center of an awful lot of it. here's this little gem: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/general/383301-us-politics-mega-thread?page=8769#175363talk about an unjustified comparison! and he's doubling down on it in the thread. boooo! will danglars ever get actioned as he deserves? he's been dragging the thread down for a long while now. half the thread knows he argues in bad faith constantly, yet the mods refuse to take action against someone that is known to argue in bad faith constantly. Mob justice and evict the thread conservatives! Yes I know their skin color and ideology was wrong, but I don't think anyone, young or old, black or white, should feel threatened coming to a school. If you think civil rights should be protected by police action based on the color of your skin, this was a sad day. Personally I don't want you evicted, I just want people to know the pattern of white supremacy they see in many of your and/or xDaunt's posts isn't coincidence, it's there and consistent. Once you recognize it, it becomes a lot easier to see it before it gets as overt as a dozen pages defending Nazi's right to advocate for genocide (with police protecting them on the tax dollars dime without any concern about the cost) and another dozen on the very dangerous slippery slope of shrouding statues in an effort to draw attention to the fact that they have been deified without consideration for the despicable things they did/advocated. The pattern isn't coincidence. It's that defending the rights of BLM is smiled upon, and defending the rights of neonazis makes you a white supremacist. And because this left-leaning forum spends a lot of time making whites out to be the "other," it turns out that normally tame posts turn into Defcon 5 for thread leftists. And more time gets devoted to them because everybody's collective panties are up in a bunch that anyone would defend marching rights and gun rights and first amendment rights of white people that aren't gay, transgender, or journalists. I can't pick what you're all furious about. I will defend my argument if I think yours is faulty ... and I'll do it over several pages if you really want to be that repetitive and plentiful in partisan assertions (historically true). But if it makes you sleep better at night assuming if you can spot Then have at it. I'm not going to try and get you banned or anything. Your participation is one of the longer ones and I have a fair idea of your political thought. EDIT: I should say your perspective is of course disgusting, but it's fairly popular among a sector of the left that sees racists/neonazis/white supremacists in any group of whites.
I get it, we all get it, Kwark isn't even that far from your position, the issue is you won't admit/accept how your own biases turn into defacto white supremacism.
That's why I asked you if you had ever done/said anything you think was racist or tinted with white supremacy.
If you can and can provide an example, I'd not confront you on race for at least a month. If you can't, it's that level of delusion that prevents us from making much progress.
|
I'd rather have your type confront me on race. It's great for the thread AND website feedback!
Now tell me, are you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist party? That's about the level of inquisition that I characterize your sentence
That's why I asked you if you had ever done/said anything you think was racist or tinted with white supremacy.
I'm getting off thread topic so I'll leave it there. You're delusional if you want to keep prosecuting this Danglars=White Supremacy thread.
|
On September 19 2017 13:16 Danglars wrote:I'd rather have your type confront me on race. It's great for the thread AND website feedback! Now tell me, are you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist party? That's about the level of inquisition that I characterize your sentence Show nested quote +That's why I asked you if you had ever done/said anything you think was racist or tinted with white supremacy. I'm getting off thread topic so I'll leave it there. You're delusional if you want to keep prosecuting this Danglars=White Supremacy thread.
I was barely a member of the Democratic party (mostly a technical thing about being a delegate), so no I haven't.
Comparing asking you if you've ever done something racist to the red scare is interesting, but wholly ridiculous (If for no other reason than I've admitted to the thing I'm asking if you've ever done).
But you see how when you ask me these questions I just answer them and then you huff off instead of returning the answer (this is at least the third time in probably a week)? It's because my question isn't the problem, it's your inability to answer. That's one major reason why the conversations regurgitate frequently and spin for pages.
|
On September 19 2017 13:25 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2017 13:16 Danglars wrote:I'd rather have your type confront me on race. It's great for the thread AND website feedback! Now tell me, are you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist party? That's about the level of inquisition that I characterize your sentence That's why I asked you if you had ever done/said anything you think was racist or tinted with white supremacy. I'm getting off thread topic so I'll leave it there. You're delusional if you want to keep prosecuting this Danglars=White Supremacy thread. I was barely a member of the Democratic party (mostly a technical thing about being a delegate), so no I haven't. Comparing asking you if you've ever done something racist to the red scare is interesting, but wholly ridiculous (If for no other reason than I've admitted to the thing I'm asking if you've ever done). But you see how when you ask me these questions I just answer them and then you huff off instead of returning the answer (this is at least the third time in probably a week)? It's because my question isn't the problem, it's your inability to answer. That's one major reason why the conversations regurgitate frequently and spin for pages.
I'll indulge you a little more. I make the comparison because the Communist party was the bugaboo like racist/WS is now. The current morphological form is racist thoughts.
Are you now or have you ever harbored racist thoughts about your fellow man? This presents as both subliminal/unconscious and overt. Back then, it was Communist party membership. McCarthy tried to demonize the men and women before him. The same applies today.
On September 19 2017 13:11 GreenHorizons wrote:
I asked you if you had ever done/said anything you think was racist or tinted with white supremacy.
The new sin for the new time. Are you guilty of wrongthink? But I'm not drilling down deep enough. The religion of the time asks us to confess our white supremacy and racism as a step to moral enlightenment. The real question is if you've admitted to original sin (white privilege) and gone to church to make a public confession. People before McCarthy also refused to answer. They were cited for contempt of Congress. I'm privileged to have the racial zealots before me now just as they had anti-Communist zealots before them then. Just as before, refusal to play the part said you were a Communist propagandist or worse. Now, you're some white supremacist.
I'm honored that you vary your accusations but continue the thread. I hope to explain to my children and grandchildren what it was like in times of high racist invective in public discourse in the 2000s and 2010s. My more memorable exchanges have been with friends and acquaintances, but you're a useful standin with text exchanges. I rather wear it as a badge of honor, you see.
|
I'll admit that some of my posts may not be as eloquently stated as others who post, but I stand by what I post. And I stand by calling a dumb post a dumb post. If people in the US Poli thread argue in bad faith consistently, troll other posters for amusement, or derail threads because they can't get their lies/half truths correct, then perhaps we should shutter it for a bit.
I'll shitpost in that thread to a shitty comment made by danglars or xD or P6 if the need arises and I'll take my warnings and bans without complaint. But to have two of the more vocal contributors in that thread given a free pass because they are a minority voice in that thread, that's unfair. If anyone continues to use circuitous comments, purposefully belittles/entices/obstruct a meaningful discussion, then I believe a warning should be handed down.
Too many times we try to get direct answers from each other and there are a few who can't manage the courage to answer them. Then we get 15 pages of trying to drag a coherent response out of them while they play dodge ball/hot potato with the question. Danglars especially continues to argue in bad faith and sees nothing wrong with his style of posting. xDaunt gives it to you straight even if he wants to just argue for the sake of it for a bit. P6, KwarK and GH are also guilty of this as well.
tl;dr clamp down on the quality of posts/discussions. These debates aren't getting anywhere because too many people deflect or evade the hot button topic we are currently discussing because it would shine a bad light on them. And yes, I'm crying a fucking river.
|
On September 19 2017 14:07 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
I'll admit that some of my posts may not be as eloquently stated as others who post, but I stand by what I post. And I stand by calling a dumb post a dumb post. If people in the US Poli thread argue in bad faith consistently, troll other posters for amusement, or derail threads because they can't get their lies/half truths correct, then perhaps we should shutter it for a bit.
I'll shitpost in that thread to a shitty comment made by danglars or xD or P6 if the need arises and I'll take my warnings and bans without complaint. But to have two of the more vocal contributors in that thread given a free pass because they are a minority voice in that thread, that's unfair. If anyone continues to use circuitous comments, purposefully belittles/entices/obstruct a meaningful discussion, then I believe a warning should be handed down.
Too many times we try to get direct answers from each other and there are a few who can't manage the courage to answer them. Then we get 15 pages of trying to drag a coherent response out of them while they play dodge ball/hot potato with the question. Danglars especially continues to argue in bad faith and sees nothing wrong with his style of posting. xDaunt gives it to you straight even if he wants to just argue for the sake of it for a bit. P6, KwarK and GH are also guilty of this as well.
tl;dr clamp down on the quality of posts/discussions. These debates aren't getting anywhere because too many people deflect or evade the hot button topic we are currently discussing because it would shine a bad light on them. And yes, I'm crying a fucking river.
Right back at you, babe. If you want to troll around and ignore this, skip over that, land on calling everybody bad people that want to get you warned and banned, you'll get no pulled punches right back. Maybe a little less victimization and a lot less racial epithets.
If you want to elaborate and dig deep and write big posts that explore nuance, that option is wide open to you. Don't let thread standards on shitposting stand in your way. Shitposting right back at perceived shitty comments is your choice. Ignoring warnings and bans is your choice. Contribute over time and you'll earn your respect, that's for sure.
On August 18 2017 22:08 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2017 22:05 Danglars wrote:On August 18 2017 21:57 Aquanim wrote:On August 18 2017 21:43 Danglars wrote:
...
Antifa makes mistakes, Nazis don't. Well, I'll admit you can't get much clearer than that.
... Assuming you disagree with that statement, can you make your disagreement with it a bit more explicit? Actually, I was disagreeing with a statement he made. Perhaps you also have an opinion on that? Violence against Nazis is a permissible offense (aka not threatening to societal health) in an existing free and open society (I really should say previously free and open society). Groups like Antifa are different, because they only rise to the level of making mistakes. THEY ARE FUCKING NAZIS DANGLARS. Are you serious? You're advocating for the well-being and protection of fucking nazis to assemble.
This was our most memorable exchange to date, but I'm looking forward to more!
|
On September 19 2017 13:48 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2017 13:25 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 19 2017 13:16 Danglars wrote:I'd rather have your type confront me on race. It's great for the thread AND website feedback! Now tell me, are you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist party? That's about the level of inquisition that I characterize your sentence That's why I asked you if you had ever done/said anything you think was racist or tinted with white supremacy. I'm getting off thread topic so I'll leave it there. You're delusional if you want to keep prosecuting this Danglars=White Supremacy thread. I was barely a member of the Democratic party (mostly a technical thing about being a delegate), so no I haven't. Comparing asking you if you've ever done something racist to the red scare is interesting, but wholly ridiculous (If for no other reason than I've admitted to the thing I'm asking if you've ever done). But you see how when you ask me these questions I just answer them and then you huff off instead of returning the answer (this is at least the third time in probably a week)? It's because my question isn't the problem, it's your inability to answer. That's one major reason why the conversations regurgitate frequently and spin for pages. I'll indulge you a little more. I make the comparison because the Communist party was the bugaboo like racist/WS is now. The current morphological form is racist thoughts. Are you now or have you ever harbored racist thoughts about your fellow man? This presents as both subliminal/unconscious and overt. Back then, it was Communist party membership. McCarthy tried to demonize the men and women before him. The same applies today. Show nested quote +On September 19 2017 13:11 GreenHorizons wrote:
I asked you if you had ever done/said anything you think was racist or tinted with white supremacy.
The new sin for the new time. Are you guilty of wrongthink? But I'm not drilling down deep enough. The religion of the time asks us to confess our white supremacy and racism as a step to moral enlightenment. The real question is if you've admitted to original sin (white privilege) and gone to church to make a public confession. People before McCarthy also refused to answer. They were cited for contempt of Congress. I'm privileged to have the racial zealots before me now just as they had anti-Communist zealots before them then. Just as before, refusal to play the part said you were a Communist propagandist or worse. Now, you're some white supremacist. I'm honored that you vary your accusations but continue the thread. I hope to explain to my children and grandchildren what it was like in times of high racist invective in public discourse in the 2000s and 2010s. My more memorable exchanges have been with friends and acquaintances, but you're a useful standin with text exchanges. I rather wear it as a badge of honor, you see.
Presuming you have missed the several times I've said this before, yes I have (not so much the white privilege since i'm black), and it's something I continue to work on.
Which is again why you should get off your cross and answer the question.
|
On September 19 2017 14:52 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2017 14:07 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
I'll admit that some of my posts may not be as eloquently stated as others who post, but I stand by what I post. And I stand by calling a dumb post a dumb post. If people in the US Poli thread argue in bad faith consistently, troll other posters for amusement, or derail threads because they can't get their lies/half truths correct, then perhaps we should shutter it for a bit.
I'll shitpost in that thread to a shitty comment made by danglars or xD or P6 if the need arises and I'll take my warnings and bans without complaint. But to have two of the more vocal contributors in that thread given a free pass because they are a minority voice in that thread, that's unfair. If anyone continues to use circuitous comments, purposefully belittles/entices/obstruct a meaningful discussion, then I believe a warning should be handed down.
Too many times we try to get direct answers from each other and there are a few who can't manage the courage to answer them. Then we get 15 pages of trying to drag a coherent response out of them while they play dodge ball/hot potato with the question. Danglars especially continues to argue in bad faith and sees nothing wrong with his style of posting. xDaunt gives it to you straight even if he wants to just argue for the sake of it for a bit. P6, KwarK and GH are also guilty of this as well.
tl;dr clamp down on the quality of posts/discussions. These debates aren't getting anywhere because too many people deflect or evade the hot button topic we are currently discussing because it would shine a bad light on them. And yes, I'm crying a fucking river. Right back at you, babe. If you want to troll around and ignore this, skip over that, land on calling everybody bad people that want to get you warned and banned, you'll get no pulled punches right back. Maybe a little less victimization and a lot less racial epithets. If you want to elaborate and dig deep and write big posts that explore nuance, that option is wide open to you. Don't let thread standards on shitposting stand in your way. Shitposting right back at perceived shitty comments is your choice. Ignoring warnings and bans is your choice. Contribute over time and you'll earn your respect, that's for sure. Show nested quote +On August 18 2017 22:08 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On August 18 2017 22:05 Danglars wrote:On August 18 2017 21:57 Aquanim wrote:On August 18 2017 21:43 Danglars wrote:
...
Antifa makes mistakes, Nazis don't. Well, I'll admit you can't get much clearer than that.
... Assuming you disagree with that statement, can you make your disagreement with it a bit more explicit? Actually, I was disagreeing with a statement he made. Perhaps you also have an opinion on that? Violence against Nazis is a permissible offense (aka not threatening to societal health) in an existing free and open society (I really should say previously free and open society). Groups like Antifa are different, because they only rise to the level of making mistakes. THEY ARE FUCKING NAZIS DANGLARS. Are you serious? You're advocating for the well-being and protection of fucking nazis to assemble. This was our most memorable exchange to date, but I'm looking forward to more!
And how long did it take for us to get to this point with the way you evade answering a question. Answer the damn thing and we wouldn't have these types of exchanges. Be straight up and people would take what you have to say with more good faith and give you the common courtesy. Until then, I stand by what I posted. You shit the thread up and you deserve to get called on it.
No where did I play a victim besides one instance nor did I use a racial epithet to call you what you claimed to be defending with burning passion. Multiple people have called you on it and you still evaded. xDaunt can at least give an answer. Yet here you are, playing the innocent who did nothing wrong. My previous stems from your long and noted history of not arguing in good faith and genuinely trying to make your posts clear. You shouldn't need twenty posts asking you to answer a question. Answer the damn thing.
|
I'm really not in the mood for whatever the next statue "debate" looks like, whatever Danglars' next excursion is into an absurd argument from a faulty premise, where he drags people into a 12 page argument primarily through his refusal to answer any questions directly, without launching into another paragraph or question, to deflect from actually revealing any of his own positions. Even on this page you have people asking him a simple question, that they already tried asking him in the proper thread, and again he skirts the question. If he wants to keep posturing and talking in circles going forward, I just won't be interacting. Simple.
There are times I don't even check the thread, because I know he's just having another argument with the world again, and even reading his circuitous nonsense gets old, leave alone trying to reason with it. If you want to disagree with everybody and deflect every honest question that comes your way, that's your business, just don't be surprised if people stop interacting with you when you do it. I would be much more willing to interact with him and hear his perspective if he actually engaged in honest conversation.
|
the whole point of his posts was/is for you(all of you) to get it; him giving his opinion would not help with that.
his arguments are presented as between you(all of you) and what is right/correct. you could call that supremacist but it's definitely not white.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
