"Who is to say what is "garbage" though? Who elected you to be the arbiter of what is or isn't garbage?"
Every individual has the right to decide what's garbage and what's valid. That's the hallmark of a critical/skeptical audience. That person wants others to prove your assertions or at least provide evidence. As I keep telling Kurt, if you back up your claims with some logic or evidence,
it's a lot harder for others to dismiss you out of hand or attack you personally. It's up to each person to determine their tolerance for seeing of inaccurate/false/unsupported/poorly reasoned statements. Too many "prove it" statements or hostile, ad hominem attacks discourage people from posting.
Too few challenges, however, lead to a forum filled with wacky conspiracy theories and extremist rants.
Why resort to personal attacks in the first place ? Don't have a supporting argument to use to disagree ?
Well you must admit that this is a pretty one sided place and anything that goes against the grain of the majority is almost always met with derision, regardless of fact.
If I challenged all the garbage posted from "your side", it would be the only thing that I would ever do here. There is only just me until recently with the return of Beaker. And with that the two of us don't agree on everything but we agree on much more than we don't.
But as I've said so many times, I pick my battles. So many times I bring up a point and the reply has nothing to do with what I initiated. Usually the reaction is "Squirrel !!"
Take my recent string of videos. No one here was even talking about the Cocaine found at the WH, and still are not saying much other than to try and make it into "weak sauce" instead of deal with the obvious ramifications. I just posted the vids (all picked out in advance), without comment, for whoever to draw their own conclusions, if any. Took the second one before there was any reaction. And then the first guess from the Cap'n was that I was referencing Joe. I had to laugh. Whooooosh ...
Well so no one here has yet to mention the security breach which is the first and most important part of all of this. It could have been Anthrax instead of blow. Just deflections and yawns. No concerns about the safety of Biden himself and those who work there. Just weal sauce and squirrels.
So who determines what is "garbage" and what isn't ? Funny, how timely. Another conspiracy is being proved to be true. Chew on this. Although a week old now, no one else has thought to bring up something so important regarding Biden.
Doughty order said the administration “seems to have assumed a role similar to an Orwellian ‘Ministry of Truth.’” The order, which was to remain in effect pending further arguments in Doughty’s court, was hailed by conservatives as a victory for free speech and a blow to censorship. But critics said the order and accompanying reasons, covering more than 160 pages, were broad, unclear and could chill government efforts to fight misinformation on important topics.
160 pages doesn't sound vague to me. Paraphrasing ...the judge considers this to be an outrageous attack on the 1st Amendment. You likely strongly disagree with all of this based upon your history here. I agree with the judge. This is what you call garbage and I call important.
I see no reason to ever attack the person...learn to ignore it, or stick to attacking the ideas, as ruthless as you may, and not the person.
As someone else once said, some really good people have some really bad ideas.
There's plenty of "garbage" on the Interwebs, and yes, even here at RP. Who is to say what is "garbage" though? Who elected you to be the arbiter of what is or isn't garbage?
The wiser person just lets the nonsense go by, ignored. If the "garbage" is abusive or in violation of some rule, then perhaps an action to counter that is required - but it doesn't justify *you* responding to it personally. As much as you wish you had that control, it's not your playpen. Protect your blood pressure - let the "garbage" you have no actual interest in honestly engaging with flow on by. There are plenty of threads here that don't interest me. Doesn't mean they shouldn't exist - or their participants should be banned from posting.
Consider your (all, generally, not you specifically islander) attitude and whether it presents an unfriendly and unwelcoming environment to lurker newbies. This topic has been brought up many times before - and yet it still doesn't seem to sink in.
â-
In a recent interview with The Babylon Bee, Elon made a comment about arguing on Twitter â The system factors in your interactions, so if you argue with a particular account, the system will assume you like arguing and show you more content that will get you to interact that way. Link "The most entertaining outcome is the most likely." - Elon Musk
"Who is to say what is "garbage" though? Who elected you to be the arbiter of what is or isn't garbage?"
Every individual has the right to decide what's garbage and what's valid. That's the hallmark of a critical/skeptical audience. That person wants others to prove your assertions or at least provide evidence. As I keep telling Kurt, if you back up your claims with some logic or evidence, it's a lot harder for others to dismiss you out of hand or attack you personally.
It's up to each person to determine their tolerance for seeing of inaccurate/false/unsupported/poorly reasoned statements. Too many "prove it" statements or hostile, ad hominem attacks discourage people from posting. Too few challenges, however, lead to a forum filled with wacky conspiracy theories and extremist rants.
I think we all can express disagreement without hostility. I don't always succeed in being polite. I can be really harsh, too harsh sometimes. But I feel compelled to challenge people who post unsupported conspiracy notions or outright lies—"Trump won 2020!", "China deliberately created Covid", "Russia is perfectly justified in invading Ukraine because the West is threatening it."
It's possible that the increased divisions in American culture have made it harder for both sides to be civil towards the other, including on this forum. There may be lurkers/newbies put off by the anger/hostility expressed here. But it's also possible that people come to this forum to socialize more these days, to escape the crazy noise of American current events.
This is the challenge. Generally, the garbage isn't worth responding to. But silence appears as acquiescence, and some of that garbage really shouldn't be left out without a strong refutation. I don't consider it my job, and I won't 'police' it, but I also won't stand quietly by when it's festering.
There's plenty of "garbage" on the Interwebs, and yes, even here at RP. Who is to say what is "garbage" though? Who elected you to be the arbiter of what is or isn't garbage?
The wiser person just lets the nonsense go by, ignored. If the "garbage" is abusive or in violation of some rule, then perhaps an action to counter that is required - but it doesn't justify *you* responding to it personally. As much as you wish you had that control, it's not your playpen. Protect your blood pressure - let the "garbage" you have no actual interest in honestly engaging with flow on by. There are plenty of threads here that don't interest me. Doesn't mean they shouldn't exist - or their participants should be banned from posting.
Consider your (all, generally, not you specifically islander) attitude and whether it presents an unfriendly and unwelcoming environment to lurker newbies. This topic has been brought up many times before - and yet it still doesn't seem to sink in.
â-
In a recent interview with The Babylon Bee, Elon made a comment about arguing on Twitter â The system factors in your interactions, so if you argue with a particular account, the system will assume you like arguing and show you more content that will get you to interact that way. Link "The most entertaining outcome is the most likely." - Elon Musk
But silence appears as acquiescence, and some of that garbage really shouldn't be left out without a strong refutation.
Somewhere you wrote to me that just because I say so does not make it right or correct or something like that.
Again, I remind you that that is a two way street.
Again, whose the intolerant one here ? It's you're way or the highway, right ? You're the one with the final say so. Uh, huh.
. islander wrote:
You don't owe tolerance to the intolerant. You don't owe serious debate to the disingenuous. He may or may not be 'coming from a different place', but he's on the same road. Nonsense, alternate 'facts', conspiracy theories and other things meant to occupy and waste time are worthy of mocking and derision. The latest weak sauce is just that - the latest.
You're Ahab and I'm you're White Whale. We know how that one ends. Happens when you let people rent space in your head for free ...
You may have all you're toys and things but I pity you. There many legitimate ways to look at the same thing. Sometimes people see the same thing coming from different directions and a common ground is found, despite different POV's and other reference points. You're a glass half empty person, imo.
This is the challenge. Generally, the garbage isn't worth responding to. But silence appears as acquiescence, and some of that garbage really shouldn't be left out without a strong refutation. I don't consider it my job, and I won't 'police' it, but I also won't stand quietly by when it's festering.
Some days I think that, and other days, no. Iâve been trying to reconcile that with the idea that arguing with someone can be just to bolster your own ego, your sense of how you know more than someone else. OTOH, itâs also not right for someone spreading something wrong to continue doing it. Sometimes thatâs a difficult choice.
This is the challenge. Generally, the garbage isn't worth responding to. But silence appears as acquiescence, and some of that garbage really shouldn't be left out without a strong refutation. I don't consider it my job, and I won't 'police' it, but I also won't stand quietly by when it's festering.
"Even when commenters read entire articles, hostile comments are often formed out of defiance rather than ignorance of evidence presented by the author. The Dunning-Kruger effect may be at play here. This principle states that a personâs perception of what they have read and the content theyâve actually read often do not align well. In other words, a person may read an article whose focus is on one area, but become attentionally derailed by a strong emotional response provoked early in the piece."
Nonsense, alternate 'facts', conspiracy theories and other things meant to occupy and waste time are worthy of mocking and derision.
Some days I think that, and other days, no. Iâve been trying to reconcile that with the idea that arguing with someone can be just to bolster your own ego, your sense of how you know more than someone else. OTOH, itâs also not right for someone spreading something wrong to continue doing it. Sometimes thatâs a difficult choice.
You don't owe tolerance to the intolerant. You don't owe serious debate to the disingenuous. He may or may not be 'coming from a different place', but he's on the same road. Nonsense, alternate 'facts', conspiracy theories and other things meant to occupy and waste time are worthy of mocking and derision. The latest weak sauce is just that - the latest.
"Even when commenters read entire articles, hostile comments are often formed out of defiance rather than ignorance of evidence presented by the author. The Dunning-Kruger effect may be at play here. This principle states that a personâs perception of what they have read and the content theyâve actually read often do not align well. In other words, a person may read an article whose focus is on one area, but become attentionally derailed by a strong emotional response provoked early in the piece."
But, really, although I might've been mean to Kurt in the past, I noticed that the RPers were being more mean to him than debating or disproving. That's not right, just like it's my music criticism bugaboo here. So often I see "I don't like this song." and then someone replies "Well you're stupid." This might just be me, but I would try to lean towards, "I really dig it, though - just listen to that drummer wail."
And I'm seeing it often in the politics - and I'm absolutely guilty of it with beaker, since they're so obviously just trying to push buttons in lieu of any substantive. (Helpfully, they admit that themselves, that they're wasting their/everyone's time with shitposts.) But I see Kurt as sincere, although coming from a completely different place. What is that place? Plenty of very very intelligent people in my life have the same perspective. Doesn't mean they're dumb. What does it mean?
But that cocaine thing is just - as the kids say - weak sauce. There are plenty of real things to hang a hat on, and that's not one of them.
and, my dog he got three legs, your dog he got none.
You don't owe tolerance to the intolerant. You don't owe serious debate to the disingenuous. He may or may not be 'coming from a different place', but he's on the same road. Nonsense, alternate 'facts', conspiracy theories and other things meant to occupy and waste time are worthy of mocking and derision. The latest weak sauce is just that - the latest.
What is that place? Plenty of very very intelligent people in my life have the same perspective. Doesn't mean they're dumb. What does it mean?
Let me guess, pure tribalism?
It's kind of like football clubs, you get pretty educated intelligent fans and you get... hooligans.
And after some matches, it's kind of hard to tell the difference.
Mr. D, Welome to the RP forum. You did well in spotting beakers disingenuousness and have now spotted kurtsers throw it all out there hope no one notices the glaring flaws. Now see if you can find the most sarcastic poster here, also be on the lookout for a dog with three legs, the number 6, and try to find four differences in the bunny rabbits.
But, really, although I might've been mean to Kurt in the past, I noticed that the RPers were being more mean to him than debating or disproving. That's not right, just like it's my music criticism bugaboo here. So often I see "I don't like this song." and then someone replies "Well you're stupid." This might just be me, but I would try to lean towards, "I really dig it, though - just listen to that drummer wail."
And I'm seeing it often in the politics - and I'm absolutely guilty of it with beaker, since they're so obviously just trying to push buttons in lieu of any substantive. (Helpfully, they admit that themselves, that they're wasting their/everyone's time with shitposts.) But I see Kurt as sincere, although coming from a completely different place. What is that place? Plenty of very very intelligent people in my life have the same perspective. Doesn't mean they're dumb. What does it mean?
But that cocaine thing is just - as the kids say - weak sauce. There are plenty of real things to hang a hat on, and that's not one of them.
and, my dog he got three legs, your dog he got none.
Seriously? In the lobby of a building with a bunch of young go-getting wannabes passing through, and a GOP intent on trying to embarrass the President any way they can including planting stuff (tantamount to the Shopped pictures or blatant lies posted in the past), and no proof that it's related to him at all...it's somehow pertinent? You throw something like that out, with literally no substance, and it messes with the idea that other things that get posted are legit.
Seriously? In the lobby of a building with a bunch of young go-getting wannabes passing through, and a GOP intent on trying to embarrass the President any way they can including planting stuff (tantamount to the Shopped pictures or blatant lies posted in the past), and no proof that it's related to him at all...it's somehow pertinent? You throw something like that out, with literally no substance, and it messes with the idea that other things that get posted are legit.
Mr. D, Welome to the RP forum. You did well in spotting beakers disingenuousness and have now spotted kurtsers throw it all out there hope no one notices the glaring flaws. Now see if you can find the most sarcastic poster here, also be on the lookout for a dog with three legs, the number 6, and try to find four differences in the bunny rabbits.
Seriously? In the lobby of a building with a bunch of young go-getting wannabes passing through, and a GOP intent on trying to embarrass the President any way they can including planting stuff (tantamount to the Shopped pictures or blatant lies posted in the past), and no proof that it's related to him at all...it's somehow pertinent? You throw something like that out, with literally no substance, and it messes with the idea that other things that get posted are legit.
