Author Topic: Rule talk  (Read 6003 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online niam2023

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 4027
  • Gender: Male
  • The Forum Chad
Re: Rule talk
« Reply #60 on: June 25, 2019, 09:49:08 pm »
That's the conservative way of thinking my friend. Everything has to be literally as written, and nothing can be a living document or interpreted by human judgement.
Living Life, Lifting, Waiting for Summer

Offline Chaos Undivided

  • Pope
  • ****
  • Posts: 465
  • Death to the False Emperor!
Re: Rule talk
« Reply #61 on: June 26, 2019, 04:56:44 pm »
There you go, implying I'm the only one at fault and I deserve the treatment I've gotten. You know, I think everyone should regularly ask themselves "what if I'm wrong?" How often do you do that?

Oh all the time.  Heck when you posted a link to politifact saying Trump's "Fine people" comment was out of context, I was all "wait really?" and read the thing to find out.  Then it turned out the link didn't say what you said it did, so I pointed that out and we made fun of you for not reading your own link, which I think is fairly deserved.

You have a point, NGL. While I maintain I did read the article, I can accept that I probably misinterpreted as taking a stance it never actually did.

That being said, saying it was "fairly deserved" is inaccurate. What I got wasn't good-natured ribbing, it was vicious mockery. Did I really "deserve" it for a fairly minor misreading?

I am so sorry that the forum policies aren't based on a literal reading of a detailed rules where someone with adequate rhetorical skills could go and look for loopholes to feel smarter than all the others. It's so horrible to be subjected to such a tyrannical system that it takes advantage of human judgement instead of literal reading of a law book or a holy scripture.

Well, how else should the rules be read? Symbolically? They're not poetry or religious scripture.

That's the conservative way of thinking my friend. Everything has to be literally as written, and nothing can be a living document or interpreted by human judgement.

If your human judgment interprets "don't be a dick" as "don't be a dick unless you can justify it somehow", I'm starting to think there's more wrong with you than "just" being a literal sociopath. Maybe you're also delusional. You ever tried feeding a stray cat to an ATM?
Anti-authoritarian, anti-extremist, anti-bullshit.

Offline davedan

  • Lord Cracker
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3340
Re: Rule talk
« Reply #62 on: June 26, 2019, 05:07:03 pm »
Please don't go ass to mouth on a stray cat. I'm pretty sure it would give you a nasty bite on your cock if you'd just been fucking it in the ass.

Online niam2023

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 4027
  • Gender: Male
  • The Forum Chad
Re: Rule talk
« Reply #63 on: June 26, 2019, 05:41:41 pm »
The rules are not going to be interpreted literally as written. That, I think, is the end of that.
Living Life, Lifting, Waiting for Summer

Offline SCarpelan

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1054
Re: Rule talk
« Reply #64 on: June 26, 2019, 09:10:22 pm »
<stuff>

Human judgement means that the rules are interpreted according to the full context of each situation, not in a platonic void. This works as long as the admins and mods use judgement in a fashion that the community experiences as fair. (You don't but the community at large disagrees with you so deal with it.) I am not at all surprised at your literal world view since it is the one that pretty much all the radical centrists I know of have and you just keep confirming it. Treating the real world as a void where you apply logical ideas in a superficially objective way that works beautifully when you ignore all the messy reality that complicates this world of platonic ideas makes people like you feel more intelligent and logical than others.

The forum has a long history of having people treated as chew toys in response to their repeated actions that have caused them to lose respect of the community and them showing no intention of reforming themselves. This has been the case for as long as I've been here (and longer, the previous chewtoys lived in the forum lore when I came). This dynamic is just more obvious now that the forum is almost dead and the chew toy is one of the most active members of the few that remain.

Offline Chaos Undivided

  • Pope
  • ****
  • Posts: 465
  • Death to the False Emperor!
Re: Rule talk
« Reply #65 on: June 26, 2019, 11:20:02 pm »
The rules are not going to be interpreted literally as written. That, I think, is the end of that.

Said the Southern politician about the 14th and 15th Amendments.

<stuff>

Human judgement means that the rules are interpreted according to the full context of each situation, not in a platonic void. This works as long as the admins and mods use judgement in a fashion that the community experiences as fair. (You don't but the community at large disagrees with you so deal with it.) I am not at all surprised at your literal world view since it is the one that pretty much all the radical centrists I know of have and you just keep confirming it. Treating the real world as a void where you apply logical ideas in a superficially objective way that works beautifully when you ignore all the messy reality that complicates this world of platonic ideas makes people like you feel more intelligent and logical than others.

Lemme get this straight: wanting rules against bad behavior to be enforced... makes me an arrogant, pretentious fart-sniffer?

The hell?

The forum has a long history of having people treated as chew toys in response to their repeated actions that have caused them to lose respect of the community and them showing no intention of reforming themselves. This has been the case for as long as I've been here (and longer, the previous chewtoys lived in the forum lore when I came). This dynamic is just more obvious now that the forum is almost dead and the chew toy is one of the most active members of the few that remain.

OK, first off, that's some blatant-ass appeal to tradition right there. "We've always done it this way!" doesn't justify asshole behavior. Especially not when change is long overdue. You know, maybe this forum wouldn't be "almost dead" if you weren't so hostile to people who didn't agree with you hard enough.

Now, let's talk about chew toys. You can't just say someone's a "chew toy" and expect that to be reason enough to mistreat them. I'm man enough to admit that I haven't been perfect. There are things I wish I hadn't said and done. But you've taken things far beyond the level of legitimate criticism to the point where it's blatantly clear that, like any fanatic, you just think anyone who doesn't agree with you wholeheartedly has some kind of problem. The fact that you keep using "centrist" as a snarl word only further serves as proof.

You're a hypocrite, you know that? You call me smug and arrogant, but you've been nothing but smug and arrogant when it comes to disagreeing with me. Take a gander at this:

I was musing based on your post but I was not answering to you. Arguing with your type about this is just a waste of energy. If this insults you you can blame a certain previous member of this forum: I simply don't have any fucks left to give when it comes to debating with pigheaded "centrists" about anything related to social justice.

Allow me to paraphrase this post: "I'm right, and anybody who disagrees with me has something wrong with them. In fact, I'm so right that I don't even have to bother defending my position, because my rightness is just that self-evident". Maybe you should learn to accept that not everyone who does not think like you is a bad person or somehow defective.
« Last Edit: June 26, 2019, 11:28:38 pm by Chaos Undivided »
Anti-authoritarian, anti-extremist, anti-bullshit.

Online niam2023

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 4027
  • Gender: Male
  • The Forum Chad
Re: Rule talk
« Reply #66 on: June 27, 2019, 01:06:38 am »
Are you seriously going for guilt by association at this point, oh Concerned Centrist?

And no - we're not about to start treating people with right wing views any better.
« Last Edit: June 27, 2019, 01:10:48 am by niam2023 »
Living Life, Lifting, Waiting for Summer

Offline davedan

  • Lord Cracker
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3340
Re: Rule talk
« Reply #67 on: June 27, 2019, 01:22:34 am »
This is all bullshit when considering how fucking disingenuous you are. Everyone knows you are someone who has been here before. Unless you confront that, it rings very hollow to accuse anyone of self-righteousness, hypocrisy or bad faith.

In fact, it's a fucking joke cracker. Which is why you kept getting laughed at.

The real difference between now and the old days wasn't the rules being enforced, but rather the rules were enforced which made everything boring.

When I joined there were several posters who would be categorised as 'chew toys'. In fact there was so much chewing that chew toys used to chew on each other. I mean there was Mr Mannnn, Skyfire and a couple of others who I've forgotten and then there was the 'Moby Dick', the great white whale, the greatest interactive nutjob of them all Nautical999, who never got tired and was in equal measures slimy and insane, so much so that it was just fucking riveting. His appearance was the great bright flare on this forum...

Offline SCarpelan

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1054
Re: Rule talk
« Reply #68 on: June 27, 2019, 03:34:19 am »
Blah blah blah.

How nice of you to further demonstrate your way of thinking that is the main target of my criticism. My arrogance towards you is precisely because I don't give a shit about you as a person and I'm only using you to discuss what is wrong with the positions you represent - or at least pretend to represent. It is also the result of a complete loss of respect and trust you have brought upon yourself. Attempting to manipulate the optics of the discussion with fake humility and moralization is part of the behavior pattern that has brought this upon you.

Yes, you can look at the form of what I said and present it as appealing to tradition - if you ingore the context of the claims that you made. This can be a dishonest rhetorical tactic or a genuinely naive, superficial way of interpreting logical concepts. You claim that the treatment you get is a reason for the forum's downfall when I am making the counter argument that it is just an aspect of the community that never prevented it from thriving in the past. Yes, we have become quite a circlejerk here compared to the past but in my opinion it is more a result of the community shrinking than a cause for it.

You are probably thinking about trying to point out that I have recently been as guilty of bad faith interpretation as those of which I am accusing you. The difference is that I am actually taking the full context of your history and expressed ideological tendencies and using that to logically infer your intentions, tactics and implied ideas. And no, there is no need for me to prove that you are Ultimately Anal if there is enough circumstantial evidence to infer that nor do I need to present this evidence if practically everyone else who is already aware of the same evidence has come to the same conclusion. This is not a competitive debate where your skills at rhetorical fencing can be more important than actual reality.

Online niam2023

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 4027
  • Gender: Male
  • The Forum Chad
Re: Rule talk
« Reply #69 on: June 27, 2019, 03:46:28 am »
In fact, for all that he talks about things, it does seem like he's trying to tie our treatment of him to the state of the forum. That the forum is dying because we're being just too mean to him for "not agreeing".

It all speaks to a sense of ego. I'd know.
Living Life, Lifting, Waiting for Summer

Offline SCarpelan

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1054
Re: Rule talk
« Reply #70 on: June 27, 2019, 04:45:40 am »
It's also an attempt at guilting people into giving him a break. Ironically, as much as he tries to present himself as more rational than thou he is also quick to use emotional manipulation (either guilt or fake humility/apology) when driven into a corner.

Offline davedan

  • Lord Cracker
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3340
Re: Rule talk
« Reply #71 on: June 27, 2019, 04:47:57 am »
Blah blah blah.

How nice of you to further demonstrate your way of thinking that is the main target of my criticism. My arrogance towards you is precisely because I don't give a shit about you as a person and I'm only using you to discuss what is wrong with the positions you represent - or at least pretend to represent. It is also the result of a complete loss of respect and trust you have brought upon yourself. Attempting to manipulate the optics of the discussion with fake humility and moralization is part of the behavior pattern that has brought this upon you.

Yes, you can look at the form of what I said and present it as appealing to tradition - if you ingore the context of the claims that you made. This can be a dishonest rhetorical tactic or a genuinely naive, superficial way of interpreting logical concepts. You claim that the treatment you get is a reason for the forum's downfall when I am making the counter argument that it is just an aspect of the community that never prevented it from thriving in the past. Yes, we have become quite a circlejerk here compared to the past but in my opinion it is more a result of the community shrinking than a cause for it.

You are probably thinking about trying to point out that I have recently been as guilty of bad faith interpretation as those of which I am accusing you. The difference is that I am actually taking the full context of your history and expressed ideological tendencies and using that to logically infer your intentions, tactics and implied ideas. And no, there is no need for me to prove that you are Ultimately Anal if there is enough circumstantial evidence to infer that nor do I need to present this evidence if practically everyone else who is already aware of the same evidence has come to the same conclusion. This is not a competitive debate where your skills at rhetorical fencing can be more important than actual reality.

Frankly even if it were a competitive debate he'd be doing absolutely shithouse. Posturing and pretending to have hurt feelings is fucking crap. All that he's conclusively proved is that if he's not DD, UP or Lana that he is someone else who used to post here and changed his name.

Unfortunately I suspect the reality is going to be far more boring than the speculation.

Offline The_Queen

  • Royalty & Royalty-free
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1837
  • Gender: Female
  • And here we go...
Re: Rule talk
« Reply #72 on: June 27, 2019, 08:25:50 am »
The rules are not going to be interpreted literally as written. That, I think, is the end of that.

Said the Southern politician about the 14th and 15th Amendments.

<stuff>

Human judgement means that the rules are interpreted according to the full context of each situation, not in a platonic void. This works as long as the admins and mods use judgement in a fashion that the community experiences as fair. (You don't but the community at large disagrees with you so deal with it.) I am not at all surprised at your literal world view since it is the one that pretty much all the radical centrists I know of have and you just keep confirming it. Treating the real world as a void where you apply logical ideas in a superficially objective way that works beautifully when you ignore all the messy reality that complicates this world of platonic ideas makes people like you feel more intelligent and logical than others.

Lemme get this straight: wanting rules against bad behavior to be enforced... makes me an arrogant, pretentious fart-sniffer?

The hell?

The forum has a long history of having people treated as chew toys in response to their repeated actions that have caused them to lose respect of the community and them showing no intention of reforming themselves. This has been the case for as long as I've been here (and longer, the previous chewtoys lived in the forum lore when I came). This dynamic is just more obvious now that the forum is almost dead and the chew toy is one of the most active members of the few that remain.

OK, first off, that's some blatant-ass appeal to tradition right there. "We've always done it this way!" doesn't justify asshole behavior. Especially not when change is long overdue. You know, maybe this forum wouldn't be "almost dead" if you weren't so hostile to people who didn't agree with you hard enough.

Now, let's talk about chew toys. You can't just say someone's a "chew toy" and expect that to be reason enough to mistreat them. I'm man enough to admit that I haven't been perfect. There are things I wish I hadn't said and done. But you've taken things far beyond the level of legitimate criticism to the point where it's blatantly clear that, like any fanatic, you just think anyone who doesn't agree with you wholeheartedly has some kind of problem. The fact that you keep using "centrist" as a snarl word only further serves as proof.

You're a hypocrite, you know that? You call me smug and arrogant, but you've been nothing but smug and arrogant when it comes to disagreeing with me. Take a gander at this:

I was musing based on your post but I was not answering to you. Arguing with your type about this is just a waste of energy. If this insults you you can blame a certain previous member of this forum: I simply don't have any fucks left to give when it comes to debating with pigheaded "centrists" about anything related to social justice.

Allow me to paraphrase this post: "I'm right, and anybody who disagrees with me has something wrong with them. In fact, I'm so right that I don't even have to bother defending my position, because my rightness is just that self-evident". Maybe you should learn to accept that not everyone who does not think like you is a bad person or somehow defective.

And yet, you’re still here
Does anyone take Donald Trump seriously, anymore?

Offline ironbite

  • Overlord of all that is good in Iacon City
  • Kakarot
  • ******
  • Posts: 10541
  • Gender: Male
  • Stuck in the middle with you.
Re: Rule talk
« Reply #73 on: June 27, 2019, 10:09:11 am »
I have Central Chaos on ignore, is he still arguing he's the glue that keeps the forum hopping and that without him we're just gonna get lost in some rock and roll and drift away from here?

Ironbite-cause I'm not sure he knows how the internet works actually.

Offline Chaos Undivided

  • Pope
  • ****
  • Posts: 465
  • Death to the False Emperor!
Re: Rule talk
« Reply #74 on: June 28, 2019, 01:36:00 am »
This is all bullshit when considering how fucking disingenuous you are. Everyone knows you are someone who has been here before. Unless you confront that, it rings very hollow to accuse anyone of self-righteousness, hypocrisy or bad faith.

In fact, it's a fucking joke cracker. Which is why you kept getting laughed at.

No, I'm not. You have no evidence for that. And as I've said before, any claim that can be made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. You might as well say I'm a dog that somehow learned to type.

Direct question: how would you feel about somebody accusing you of being a child molester or a war criminal without any kind of evidence beyond personal opinion?

The real difference between now and the old days wasn't the rules being enforced, but rather the rules were enforced which made everything boring.

When I joined there were several posters who would be categorised as 'chew toys'. In fact there was so much chewing that chew toys used to chew on each other. I mean there was Mr Mannnn, Skyfire and a couple of others who I've forgotten and then there was the 'Moby Dick', the great white whale, the greatest interactive nutjob of them all Nautical999, who never got tired and was in equal measures slimy and insane, so much so that it was just fucking riveting. His appearance was the great bright flare on this forum...

Even if that's true, the fact remains quite a few former users have left the forums and not come back because they considered them toxic. I posted multiple testimonials to that effect on the previous page. Why is it so hard for you to acknowledge that maybe being openly arrogant and hostile towards people with different opinions isn't helping your forum grow?

Blah blah blah.

How nice of you to further demonstrate your way of thinking that is the main target of my criticism. My arrogance towards you is precisely because I don't give a shit about you as a person and I'm only using you to discuss what is wrong with the positions you represent - or at least pretend to represent. It is also the result of a complete loss of respect and trust you have brought upon yourself. Attempting to manipulate the optics of the discussion with fake humility and moralization is part of the behavior pattern that has brought this upon you.

Yes, you can look at the form of what I said and present it as appealing to tradition - if you ingore the context of the claims that you made. This can be a dishonest rhetorical tactic or a genuinely naive, superficial way of interpreting logical concepts. You claim that the treatment you get is a reason for the forum's downfall when I am making the counter argument that it is just an aspect of the community that never prevented it from thriving in the past. Yes, we have become quite a circlejerk here compared to the past but in my opinion it is more a result of the community shrinking than a cause for it.

You are probably thinking about trying to point out that I have recently been as guilty of bad faith interpretation as those of which I am accusing you. The difference is that I am actually taking the full context of your history and expressed ideological tendencies and using that to logically infer your intentions, tactics and implied ideas. And no, there is no need for me to prove that you are Ultimately Anal if there is enough circumstantial evidence to infer that nor do I need to present this evidence if practically everyone else who is already aware of the same evidence has come to the same conclusion. This is not a competitive debate where your skills at rhetorical fencing can be more important than actual reality.

Well, at least you're honest about being an egotistical bully. But don't pretend your dislike of me is based on any kind of logic. No, it's based on your own prejudices and biases. I know this because 1. you wrote me off as a "pigheaded centrist" very early on and 2. you haven't presented any kind of evidence for your accusations beyond "we all know". You say your dislike of me is because you've pegged me as a ban-dodging, manipulative, arrogant prick, and it's not unlikely you actually believe it. But just because you say and believe something, doesn't make it true. Why don't you stop assuming you're always right and start trying to prove you're not just talking out of your ass?

And you haven't presented even circumstantial evidence for me to challenge, just your own opinions. Saying "everyone has come to the same conclusion" is a completely meaningless statement, since you yourself admitted that this board is a circlejerk. The fact that you, ironbite, Queen, Tol, dave, fluffy, and niam (and possibly some others I forgot) are all acting like dicks to me based on unfounded accusations and your own political extremism is not my fault. You want to disagree with me? Fine. Go ahead. I value freedom of thought, and freedom to express thought. What I'm not OK with is you treating me like I'm defective or a bad person for holding opinions you disagree with, accusing me of arguing in bad faith (or worse) without any kind of evidence, and constantly dogpiling me like I'm this football ref, among other things.

What the fuck did I do to deserve this? I've made mistakes, yeah, but that doesn't mean your harshness is warranted. You want to give me constructive criticism? No problem. I can handle that. But you're just being complete dicks to me based on harmless mistakes. Your responses were completely out of proportion. How did I hurt any of you? I didn't come here looking for fights, but fights keep finding me.

And what did I say that was so unreasonable? I am not Jacob Harrison. I haven't advocated absolute monarchy, theocratic government, or punishing gay people with chemical castration. I don't want to bring back having people hanged, drawn and quartered. And I haven't tried to justify the expulsions of the Spanish Jews or the California Genocide. And yet you guys keep talking like I'm somehow on par with him. That says a lot of unpleasant things about you. It says you're a bunch of closed-minded, judgmental, arrogant, hypocritical, and downright nasty douchebags who think backing up the claims you make with evidence is optional and lump everyone who doesn't agree with you hard enough into a group you think of as "the enemy". You're textbook religious fanatics, except your "religion" is warped progressivism. To think you call yourselves members of the skeptic community. What a fucking joke.

But you probably won't have to put up with me much longer. Unless the mods agree to have a serious conversation about the rules and their enforcement with me and the rest of the userbase, I'm going to leave this forum and not look back. Your forum can shrivel up and die like a fallen leaf for all I care.

Though before I go, I'd like to say one thing: I don't hate everyone else here. Hell, some of you I like. Ravy, Askold, Kanzen, dpareja, Sigma, and others come to mind (sorry in advance if I got any of your names wrong). While we're on the subject, I don't even hate Skybison, because he seemed to be at least trying to come to some kind of understanding with me. FWIW, I can at least respect him for that. We may not have always agreed, but that doesn't mean I think of you as enemies. And if I do end up leaving, it was nice knowing you guys, however briefly. Maybe we could be friends somewhere else? Just a thought.
Anti-authoritarian, anti-extremist, anti-bullshit.