Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-18-2019, 04:17 PM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 4,416

Admitting When You Are Wrong in Great Debates


I've seen many, many people twist themselves into pretzels when they are called out on something in Great Debates, are shown to be wrong, but then simply won't admit it. If you are one of these people, wouldn't it be easier to just say you were wrong and move on? Do you not insult your own intelligence when you realize the other person(s) were right but can't come out and say it? Is it not more humiliating in your own mind not to do so, and then continue on with some pathetic attempt to save face?

I realize that asking this question in this manner may result in few people who have ever found themselves in this position answering it honestly, because that would require them to do what they couldn't do in the Great Debate thread in the first place. Namely, that doing so would be an admission that they were once WRONG!, and we can't admit that, now can we?

Being that this thread will likely get no responses (and I jest here) because I do not hope this is the case and don't think it will be, I hereby offer it a service to the Dope. Whenever you find yourself in such a situation, and the other person won't come clean, just link back to this thread, and your point will be clear.
  #2  
Old 09-18-2019, 04:25 PM
begbert2 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Idaho
Posts: 13,267
I always thought that the standard way to admit error was to drop the subject and never speak if it again, abandoning the entire thread if necessary.
  #3  
Old 09-18-2019, 04:31 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 62,577
Every single time I find out that I am wrong I will say "I was wrong".
  #4  
Old 09-18-2019, 04:33 PM
begbert2 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Idaho
Posts: 13,267
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
Every single time I find out that I am wrong I will say "I was wrong".
My response is usually more along the lines of "details, schmeetails. I'm still right about everything else and you failed to counter my main point anyway."

I'm charming like that.
  #5  
Old 09-18-2019, 04:41 PM
Icarus's Avatar
Icarus is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: In front of my PC, y tu?
Posts: 5,314
I thought I was wrong once, but I was mistaken.
  #6  
Old 09-18-2019, 05:04 PM
Skywatcher's Avatar
Skywatcher is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Somewhere in the Potomac
Posts: 35,062
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddle Peghead View Post
Whenever you find yourself in such a situation, and the other person won't come clean, just link back to this thread, and your point will be clear.
Please don't. I've gotten in trouble for that sort of thing.
  #7  
Old 09-18-2019, 05:40 PM
don't ask is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,319
I have long argued that Great Debates should be renamed The Argument Sketch From Monty Python for the very reason the OP posits.
  #8  
Old 09-18-2019, 05:47 PM
bucketybuck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Ireland
Posts: 3,217
Today I happened to read through 2 pages of a thread in GD about guns and the media, started by DrDickhead and with a steaming turd by resident troll Hurricanedickhead thrown in as standard.

The amount of utter bollocks I read in just 2 pages was incredible, and further cemented my opinion that this board is just troll central. There is no way that anybody writes those posts, writes those words without realising just how fucking stupid they really are.

Admit they are wrong? Most of those cunts know full well they are wrong, they knew it before they hit the submit reply button. So why would they admit to being wrong when being right isn't why they are here in the first place?
  #9  
Old 09-18-2019, 05:52 PM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 4,416
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skywatcher View Post
Please don't. I've gotten in trouble for that sort of thing.
Yeah, I thought about this on the way home. Not a good idea, because questioning someone's honesty in GD is verboten. I retract this idea. It was wrong. And thanks for bringing it up and reminding me so I could come here and admit that I was, you know, wrong.

Last edited by Fiddle Peghead; 09-18-2019 at 05:54 PM.
  #10  
Old 09-18-2019, 05:53 PM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 4,416
Oh, and for the record, I've been guilty to some degree of this, being reluctant to admit I said something incorrect, but it was way in the past and for many years I've tried to live by the OP concept.

Last edited by Fiddle Peghead; 09-18-2019 at 05:56 PM.
  #11  
Old 09-18-2019, 08:07 PM
Annoyed is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 339
Great example of this (in the pit but no doubt said everywhere else)i had recently was that “Donald Trump said Nazis were very fine people!”

No, no he didn’t. No, he didn’t even imply it. You can post the entire transcript of the statement where he never says it and people will STILL say he said it, being completely wrong and knowing it.

People who like to talk politics are tribal, and just like their favorite politicians it’s all about twisting and bending and lying.
  #12  
Old 09-18-2019, 08:52 PM
74westy's Avatar
74westy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Regina, SK, Canada
Posts: 2,000
Quote:
Originally Posted by don't ask View Post
I have long argued that Great Debates should be renamed The Argument Sketch From Monty Python for the very reason the OP posits.
No it shouldn't.
  #13  
Old 09-18-2019, 09:02 PM
El_Kabong's Avatar
El_Kabong is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Smack Dab in the Middle
Posts: 15,687

Admitting When You Are Wrong in Great Debates


Wait, you can do that?
  #14  
Old 09-18-2019, 09:20 PM
Monty's Avatar
Monty is online now
Straight Dope Science Advisory Board
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Beijing, China
Posts: 23,494
Quote:
Originally Posted by Annoyed View Post
Great example of this (in the pit but no doubt said everywhere else)i had recently was that “Donald Trump said Nazis were very fine people!”

No, no he didn’t. No, he didn’t even imply it. You can post the entire transcript of the statement where he never says it and people will STILL say he said it, being completely wrong and knowing it.

People who like to talk politics are tribal, and just like their favorite politicians it’s all about twisting and bending and lying.

Bullshit. Trump specifically said "There are fine people on both sides". One of the sides he was referring to is neo-Nazis. You know what neo-Nazis are? They're Nazis, you nitwit.

But, of course, you're no stranger to lying.
  #15  
Old 09-18-2019, 10:46 PM
Daylate is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 1,645
No married man will survive very long by insisting that he is NEVER wrong.

Sixty plus years of experience are behind that statement.
  #16  
Old 09-18-2019, 10:52 PM
Annoyed is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 339
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monty View Post
Bullshit. Trump specifically said "There are fine people on both sides". One of the sides he was referring to is neo-Nazis. You know what neo-Nazis are? They're Nazis, you nitwit.

But, of course, you're no stranger to lying.
Aaaaaaaand exhibit A ^

You say this knowing that in the very same statement, 2 or three sentences after this, he specifically says that he’s not talking about neo-Nazis, yet you mischaracterize his statement intentionally. If you watch/read the statement in full context it’s clear he’s saying that there were people there that were not neo Nazis and were protesting the removal of the statue, unaffiliated with them.

He never said what you say he said and he didn’t even imply it.

The only legitimate argument you can make is that it was a bumbling, moronic statement but to think and claim that he said something that he didn’t is just embarrassing.

Trump Didn't Call Neo-Nazis 'Fine People.' Here's Proof.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/ar...of_139815.html

Quote:
News anchors and pundits have repeated lies about Donald Trump and race so often that some of these narratives seem true, even to Americans who embrace the fruits of the president’s policies. The most pernicious and pervasive of these lies is the “Charlottesville Hoax,” the fake-news fabrication that he described the neo-Nazis who rallied in Charlottesville, Va., in August 2017 as “fine people.”

Just last week I exposed this falsehood, yet again, when CNN contributor Keith Boykin falsely stated, “When violent people were marching with tiki torches in Charlottesville, the president said they were ‘very fine people.’” When I objected and detailed that Trump’s “fine people on both sides” observation clearly related to those on both sides of the Confederate monument debate, and specifically excluded the violent supremacists, anchor Erin Burnett interjected, “He [Trump] didn’t say it was on the monument debate at all. No, they didn’t even try to use that defense. It’s a good one, but no one’s even tried to use it, so you just used it now.”

My colleagues seem prepared to dispute our own network’s correct contemporaneous reporting and the very clear transcripts of the now-infamous Trump Tower presser on the tragic events of Charlottesville. Here are the unambiguous actual words of President Trump:

“Excuse me, they didn’t put themselves down as neo-Nazis, and you had some very bad people in that group. But you also had people that were very fine people on both sides. You had people in that group – excuse me, excuse me, I saw the same pictures you did. You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down of, to them, a very, very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name.”


After another question at that press conference, Trump became even more explicit:

“I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and white nationalists because they should be condemned totally.”
  #17  
Old 09-19-2019, 02:23 AM
bucketybuck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Ireland
Posts: 3,217
See what I mean? Fucking troll central.
  #18  
Old 09-19-2019, 02:36 AM
Annoyed is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 339
Quote:
Originally Posted by bucketybuck View Post
See what I mean? Fucking troll central.
Translation:

“Boo hoo the bad man won’t let me lie”
  #19  
Old 09-19-2019, 03:40 AM
kaylasdad99 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 32,051
Oh huzzah, another episode of the Annoyed Show (with special guest star Morey Amsterdam).
  #20  
Old 09-19-2019, 04:14 AM
Dead Cat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 4,281
I am no fan of Donald Trump, the Republican Party, or the right-wing of this board. But if this:

“Excuse me, they didn’t put themselves down as neo-Nazis, and you had some very bad people in that group. But you also had people that were very fine people on both sides. You had people in that group – excuse me, excuse me, I saw the same pictures you did. You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down of, to them, a very, very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name.”

is what Donald Trump said, then just on the basis of that I would be inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt. in other words I don't think he believes/said that neo-Nazis are very fine people and it is unfair to state that he did say or imply that.

I would genuinely like to be shown where I am wrong and if so I will happily admit such .
  #21  
Old 09-19-2019, 04:52 AM
Annoyed is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 339
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dead Cat View Post
I am no fan of Donald Trump, the Republican Party, or the right-wing of this board. But if this:

“Excuse me, they didn’t put themselves down as neo-Nazis, and you had some very bad people in that group. But you also had people that were very fine people on both sides. You had people in that group – excuse me, excuse me, I saw the same pictures you did. You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down of, to them, a very, very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name.”

is what Donald Trump said, then just on the basis of that I would be inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt. in other words I don't think he believes/said that neo-Nazis are very fine people and it is unfair to state that he did say or imply that.

I would genuinely like to be shown where I am wrong and if so I will happily admit such .
Finally, an objective person.

Also, don’t forget, he said this in the same interview:

“I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and white nationalists because they should be condemned totally.”
  #22  
Old 09-19-2019, 05:18 AM
Budget Player Cadet's Avatar
Budget Player Cadet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 9,660
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dead Cat View Post
I am no fan of Donald Trump, the Republican Party, or the right-wing of this board. But if this:

“Excuse me, they didn’t put themselves down as neo-Nazis, and you had some very bad people in that group. But you also had people that were very fine people on both sides. You had people in that group – excuse me, excuse me, I saw the same pictures you did. You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down of, to them, a very, very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name.”

is what Donald Trump said, then just on the basis of that I would be inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt. in other words I don't think he believes/said that neo-Nazis are very fine people and it is unfair to state that he did say or imply that.

I would genuinely like to be shown where I am wrong and if so I will happily admit such .
Full quote, courtesy of Vox:

Quote:

TRUMP: I am not putting anybody on a moral plane, what I’m saying is this: you had a group on one side and a group on the other, and they came at each other with clubs and it was vicious and horrible and it was a horrible thing to watch, but there is another side. There was a group on this side, you can call them the left. You’ve just called them the left, that came violently attacking the other group. So you can say what you want, but that’s the way it is.

REPORTER: You said there was hatred and violence on both sides?

TRUMP: I do think there is blame – yes, I think there is blame on both sides. You look at, you look at both sides. I think there’s blame on both sides, and I have no doubt about it, and you don’t have any doubt about it either. And, and, and, and if you reported it accurately, you would say.

REPORTER: The neo-Nazis started this thing. They showed up in Charlottesville.

TRUMP: Excuse me, they didn’t put themselves down as neo-Nazis, and you had some very bad people in that group. But you also had people that were very fine people on both sides. You had people in that group – excuse me, excuse me. I saw the same pictures as you did. You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down, of to them, a very, very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name.
The problem is... they did put themselves down as neo-nazis. One side was absolutely, undeniably neo-nazis. The lie here is that this was a protest of conservatives about the statues that involved some neo-nazis. But it wasn't - this was organized by and for neo-nazis. It was advertised as a neo-nazi event using neo-nazi symbolism and memes. People weren't there to protest a statue. They were there to affirm their neo-nazi beliefs.

If Donald Trump wasn't talking about the neo-nazis... Who was he talking about? Because the people on the right at Charlottesville were either neo-nazis, or marching alongside neo-nazis, and if that's a hair you want to split, I really have to wonder why.

So taking Trump as charitably as humanly possible, he unintentionally gave a group of violent neo-nazis exactly the characterization they wanted - that they're just good ol'-fashioned conservatives with a few bad apples. And he did so by knowing exactly fuck-all about the case at hand, and by contradicting a reporter who tried to inform him about the state of affairs. Is it any wonder that people have problems with that?
  #23  
Old 09-19-2019, 05:45 AM
Dead Cat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 4,281
Thank you for the further information, that's very clear. In that case, my take on it is the same as yours - Trump probably does not think it is acceptable to publicly call neo-Nazis "very fine people" and did not intend to do so. But, because he was unaware that that particular event was (almost?) solely neo-Nazis on one side, he ended up equating peaceful protesters (some of whom may be "very fine people", if - in my view - misguided) with neo-Nazis. Which, as you say, is a problem in itself on several levels, and I'm certainly not here to defend that.

What I will say is that if you want to rail against Trump and his agenda, I think it's important to be completely accurate and evidence-based, otherwise the conversation degenerates into this kind of distraction. But I'm sure that point has been made many times before. I must admit I don't tend to read those threads.

Thanks again for the clarification.
  #24  
Old 09-19-2019, 07:09 AM
El_Kabong's Avatar
El_Kabong is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Smack Dab in the Middle
Posts: 15,687
Hey, I'm perfectly happy to spot Annoyed the "fine people" remark and just condemn Trump for the other 10,000 or so false and/or moronic things he's said since his inauguration.
  #25  
Old 09-19-2019, 07:19 AM
str8cashhomie is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dead Cat View Post
But, because he was unaware that that particular event was (almost?) solely neo-Nazis on one side, he ended up equating peaceful protesters (some of whom may be "very fine people", if - in my view - misguided) with neo-Nazis. Which, as you say, is a problem in itself on several levels, and I'm certainly not here to defend that.
However he was then corrected that the right-wing protesters actually were an alt-right group and maintained his original position that the people who "started this thing" - undeniably a neo-nazi group - were not neonazis. The ignorance defense is not applicable at that point.
  #26  
Old 09-19-2019, 07:24 AM
Annoyed is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 339
Quote:
Originally Posted by El_Kabong View Post
Hey, I'm perfectly happy to spot Annoyed the "fine people" remark and just condemn Trump for the other 10,000 or so false and/or moronic things he's said since his inauguration.
And that makes you a person of fine character. Plenty of buffoonery to mock that actually happened.
  #27  
Old 09-19-2019, 07:51 AM
bobot's Avatar
bobot is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Chicago-ish
Posts: 9,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by begbert2 View Post
I always thought that the standard way to admit error was to drop the subject and never speak if it again, abandoning the entire thread if necessary.
Yeah. And its partner strategy: Publicly declaring that you (not You, you) don't participate in the Pit anyway.
  #28  
Old 09-19-2019, 07:56 AM
Steve MB is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 13,422
Quote:
Originally Posted by Annoyed View Post
Aaaaaaaand exhibit A ^
Yes, but all you have to do is admit you're wrong about this and the exhibit will no longer be applicable.
__________________
The Internet: Nobody knows if you're a dog. Everybody knows if you're a jackass.
  #29  
Old 09-19-2019, 08:08 AM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 4,416
Quote:
Originally Posted by begbert2 View Post
I always thought that the standard way to admit error was to drop the subject and never speak if it again, abandoning the entire thread if necessary.
A time honored technique, to be sure. But what if you want to continue in the discussion?
  #30  
Old 09-19-2019, 08:27 AM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 4,416
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dead Cat View Post
Thank you for the further information, that's very clear. In that case, my take on it is the same as yours - Trump probably does not think it is acceptable to publicly call neo-Nazis "very fine people" and did not intend to do so. But, because he was unaware that that particular event was (almost?) solely neo-Nazis on one side, he ended up equating peaceful protesters (some of whom may be "very fine people", if - in my view - misguided) with neo-Nazis. Which, as you say, is a problem in itself on several levels, and I'm certainly not here to defend that.
Not to hijack my own thread with the Trump neo-Nazi thing, but I was the one who brought this up in the Donald Trump "clusterfuck" thread recently, that he wasn't talking about Nazis. What you say in the bolded part is what I think people miss. They assume Trump has all knowledge about who was at the event and why. But it doesn't matter if Trump got these facts right in his head or not. As long as he believes some people were there simply because they wanted the statues to stay up, and that these same people were not neo-Nazis*, then it is entirely plausible that he of course was not referring to neo-Nazis as fine people.

* Why it is so difficult for some people to believe you can have reasons to want to keep the statues and NOT be a neo-Nazi is beyond me, btw.

Last edited by Fiddle Peghead; 09-19-2019 at 08:31 AM. Reason: remove irrelevant point
  #31  
Old 09-19-2019, 09:41 AM
Annoyed is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 339
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddle Peghead View Post
it is entirely plausible that he of course was not referring to neo-Nazis as fine people.
And of course he literally says in that very same interview, minutes later, which the Vox article intentionally left out (or maybe the writer of the post intentionally left out) that he’s not talking about Nazis or white supremacists and that they should be condemned totally.

It’s not just “plausible” it’s an established fact, from his own mouth.
  #32  
Old 09-19-2019, 09:47 AM
bobot's Avatar
bobot is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Chicago-ish
Posts: 9,137
If Trump believes that nazis "should be" condemned, then what the fuck is he waiting for?

Last edited by bobot; 09-19-2019 at 09:47 AM. Reason: lowercase n
  #33  
Old 09-19-2019, 09:53 AM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 62,577
Attempted hijack aside, I hate it when posters post something that is corrected, acknowledge the correction begrudgingly...then post the same already-corrected crap in another thread on the same subject.
  #34  
Old 09-19-2019, 10:02 AM
Jackmannii's Avatar
Jackmannii is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: the extreme center
Posts: 32,184
It's OK to concede an erroneous statement without explicitly saying "I was wrong - beat me with armadillo tails and let me be eaten by starving baby elephants"*.

I find that to be more acceptable than continually posting provocative, false claims leading to lengthy acrimonious debate, then finally saying "I was wrong about that, sorry" and receiving fulsome praise for admitting error (we had a poster who continually employed that M.O.).

*obscure Fugs song reference.
  #35  
Old 09-19-2019, 10:08 AM
What Exit?'s Avatar
What Exit? is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Central NJ (near Bree)
Posts: 29,366
Quote:
Originally Posted by Annoyed View Post
Great example of this (in the pit but no doubt said everywhere else)i had recently was that “Donald Trump said Nazis were very fine people!”

No, no he didn’t. No, he didn’t even imply it. You can post the entire transcript of the statement where he never says it and people will STILL say he said it, being completely wrong and knowing it.

People who like to talk politics are tribal, and just like their favorite politicians it’s all about twisting and bending and lying.
You are a complete asshole for hijacking this thread. It is possibly clueless but likely trolling. I am reporting this post by the way as trolling. Let the mods decide what to do with a little shitstain like you.
  #36  
Old 09-19-2019, 10:12 AM
What Exit?'s Avatar
What Exit? is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Central NJ (near Bree)
Posts: 29,366
So back on topic. I agree with the Op and will go a step further.

Between those who never back down even when presented with facts, trolls and nitpickers that will bring up extraneous BS that push buttons and those damn parsers, GD is a flaming garbage fire in my humble opinion.
  #37  
Old 09-19-2019, 10:16 AM
Annoyed is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 339
Quote:
Originally Posted by What Exit? View Post
You are a complete asshole for hijacking this thread. It is possibly clueless but likely trolling. I am reporting this post by the way as trolling. Let the mods decide what to do with a little shitstain like you.
I have absolutely no doubt that there are several people furiously hammering the report button on me at all times, considering the replies I get sometimes.

It shall be interesting to see what happens with your complaint. As far as I can see I’ve broken no rules and that post is completely relevant to the topic at hand.

Good luck.
  #38  
Old 09-19-2019, 10:29 AM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 4,416
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackmannii View Post
It's OK to concede an erroneous statement without explicitly saying "I was wrong - beat me with armadillo tails and let me be eaten by starving baby elephants"*.

I find that to be more acceptable than continually posting provocative, false claims leading to lengthy acrimonious debate, then finally saying "I was wrong about that, sorry" and receiving fulsome praise for admitting error (we had a poster who continually employed that M.O.).

*obscure Fugs song reference.
Oh, certainly. A simple acknowledgement that you missed something, or misunderstood a link, or whatever, and you stand corrected is more than adequate. Of course, its harder to admit that your whole premise was wrong, and the aforementioned technique of just dropping out of the thread is easier in this case, and probably happens quite a bit. I'm happy to say I've never resorted to that, but give me time.
  #39  
Old 09-19-2019, 10:30 AM
Dead Cat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 4,281
I apologise for promulgating the hijack, I could have read about the issue or even discussed it in one of the many other threads it fits in - I was wrong to bring that discussion here.
  #40  
Old 09-19-2019, 10:33 AM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 4,416
Quote:
Originally Posted by What Exit? View Post
So back on topic. I agree with the Op and will go a step further.

Between those who never back down even when presented with facts, trolls and nitpickers that will bring up extraneous BS that push buttons and those damn parsers, GD is a flaming garbage fire in my humble opinion.
I don't find this to be the case in a lot of GD threads, I'm happy to say, but it is certainly more likely to occur in some cases ( ::cough:: gun control ::cough:: ) rather than others.
  #41  
Old 09-19-2019, 10:39 AM
BigT's Avatar
BigT is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: "Hicksville", Ark.
Posts: 36,595
Quote:
Originally Posted by Annoyed View Post
I have absolutely no doubt that there are several people furiously hammering the report button on me at all times, considering the replies I get sometimes.

It shall be interesting to see what happens with your complaint. As far as I can see I’ve broken no rules and that post is completely relevant to the topic at hand.

Good luck.
You didn't break any rules, but only because there basically aren't any in the Pit.

However, you did hijack the thread to become about Trump when that is not the topic. You have an extended discussion.

And you very clearly post with the intent to piss people off. You constantly talk about how everyone on the SDMB is horrible. And this response here is not the response of a non-troll being accused of trolling. Defiance is not a normal reaction.

You're hated here because you regularly act like an asshole, and treat people like garbage. You provide nothing of value to the board. Hell, now I'm going to have to clean up the nonsensical mess you've made that have gotten people to agree to something fucking stupid.
  #42  
Old 09-19-2019, 10:45 AM
BigT's Avatar
BigT is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: "Hicksville", Ark.
Posts: 36,595
No, for fuck's sake. The context was anti-Nazi protesters being harmed by Nazi violence. Of course Trump would say they weren't Nazis, because you can't be publicly seen as defending Nazis. But there would be no way he would have heard about the situation without being told it was about Nazis vs. anti-Nazis.

This is also entirely consistent with his actions in many situations, from racist shit he's said about black people, to making posts that appeal to his Nazi base (like the stuff with Pepe), his appointment of several white nationalist people to places of power, and his own personal philosophy that the Trump are superior due to their genetics.

There is no reason to need to go to these absurd lengths to hyperliterally parse his words to figure out what he actually meant. It's the sort of thing that happens when you like someone and they do something bad: you look for excuses so you can continue liking them.

We are in a world of cryptofascists and dogwhistles. When you see someone going hyperliteral, you know they're trying to pull one over. Don't fall for the nonsense. Always remember to stay above that level, looking at the bigger picture.

Don't miss the forest for the trees.

Last edited by BigT; 09-19-2019 at 10:46 AM.
  #43  
Old 09-19-2019, 10:47 AM
What Exit?'s Avatar
What Exit? is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Central NJ (near Bree)
Posts: 29,366
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT View Post
...
We are in a world of cryptofascists and dogwhistles. When you see someone going hyperliteral, you know they're trying to pull one over. Don't fall for the nonsense.
You're enabling a troll. Take it to another thread maybe? But stop helping the troll with his masturbation.
  #44  
Old 09-19-2019, 10:53 AM
Annoyed is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 339
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT View Post
Defiance is not a normal reaction.
So you want me to lick your fuckin’ boots & beg for forgiveness because my precious little words make a few of you rage out?

Get fucked.

EDIT: lilT up there just added a second wall of text to the “hijack” that no doubt will somehow be my fault.

Last edited by Annoyed; 09-19-2019 at 10:57 AM. Reason: lilPP being a hypocrite
  #45  
Old 09-19-2019, 12:38 PM
manson1972's Avatar
manson1972 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 12,032
Quote:
Originally Posted by 74westy View Post
No it shouldn't.
Just saying "No it [isn't]" isn't an argument.
  #46  
Old 09-19-2019, 12:39 PM
Ludovic is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: America's Wing
Posts: 30,393
You're right.
  #47  
Old 09-19-2019, 12:47 PM
Ravenman is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 26,693
Quote:
Originally Posted by Annoyed View Post
Great example of this (in the pit but no doubt said everywhere else)i had recently was that “Donald Trump said Nazis were very fine people!”

No, no he didn’t. No, he didn’t even imply it. You can post the entire transcript of the statement where he never says it and people will STILL say he said it, being completely wrong and knowing it.

People who like to talk politics are tribal, and just like their favorite politicians it’s all about twisting and bending and lying.
You know what you call a march of ten proud neo-Nazis and ten people joining in with them?

A twenty person neo-Nazi march.
  #48  
Old 09-19-2019, 12:48 PM
octopus's Avatar
octopus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 8,978
Quote:
Originally Posted by begbert2 View Post
I always thought that the standard way to admit error was to drop the subject and never speak if it again, abandoning the entire thread if necessary.
That is internet debate 101.
  #49  
Old 09-19-2019, 12:48 PM
cochrane is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: The Nekkid Pueblo
Posts: 22,221
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT View Post
Hell, now I'm going to have to clean up the nonsensical mess you've made that have gotten people to agree to something fucking stupid.
You? What are going to clean up? Did they make you a mod and not send me the memo?
  #50  
Old 09-19-2019, 12:48 PM
manson1972's Avatar
manson1972 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 12,032
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ludovic View Post
You're right.
No I'm not!

wait, i might be doing it wrong.

also, why isn't there a "thinking" smilie????
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:29 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017