Of course fuckwittery is relative and subjective. Fuckwitness the two aforementioned fuckwits. amused is merely a casual fuckwitling who mustered up the energy for a meltdown; Beryl is a dangerously insane fuckwitchetty.
But that is all beside the point; I still find it allowable to open a thread decrying annoying board trends without popping into each thread exhibiting this trend to make your case.
IIRC history records Darwin being called a “fuckwit” or some similar remark at least twenty times. Matter of fact, there’s probably millions of folks who still think he’s mistaken. I’m kinda glad he hung in there. I bet there are a few other examples one could cite.
It appears I have wandered into some personal attack. I guess I’m the f/w now…please continue.
GREAT UNWASHED –
This is a thread about an identifiable trend and not about any particular thread or poster. Believe me, if I wanted to make it about anyone specific, I would have included links. So perhaps rather than guessing what the thread is “really” about, you might simply read it and assume it’s about precisely what it appears to be about. And I think I have pretty much the same right to use bandwidth as anyone else around here, so I generally disregard the opinions of self-styled arbiters who might take it upon themselves to royally decree when I am “wasting” it or to attempt to shame me for something so piddling.
This amazes me. “Nothing more”? There’s nothing more to be gleaned from the fact that a significant number of people believe you’re behaving badly/ arguing poorly/ flat-out wrong, than that, hey, that’s just 20 people’s opinions?
Ridiculous. If several people hold an identical and apparently rational opinion regarding your behavior, it would behoove you to consider whether there isn’t some justice to that opinon – because what are the odds they’d all agree on it, if there wasn’t? To what do we ascribe it? Mass delusion? (Unlikely.) Or mass idiocy? (Equally unlikely.)
I am not saying that in every case you, the beseiged one, will be wrong and everyone else right. I am saying that if a group of people (more than two or three) tell you you’re wrong AND they are apparently rational people with no particular ax to grind against you AND there is a total lack of other voices insisting that, no, you are right, then your time would be well-spent in reevaluating or reconsidering your own position. Do you actually disagree with this?
Because it is hardly an endorsement of the ridiculous proposition that “truth is a matter to be decided by populist vote,” which I certainly never said. But then, I have also discovered that if people can’t find grounds to argue with what you actually said, they’ll sometimes argue with something you did it, as if the existence of an argument is the thing.
“They’ll argue with something you didn’t,” that is.
"So perhaps rather than guessing what the thread is “really” about, you might simply read it and assume it’s about precisely what it appears to be about."
Hey, maybe I’m not a F/W after all. 
But apparently the Wright brothers were.
In short, boys and girls, in most cases there is no difference between insanity and a minority of one - because we live in the real world, and not a dystopian novel.
They all laughed at Christopher Columbus, when he said the world was round. They all laughed when Edison regarded sound.
Francescsa: Don’t tell too many people, but Columbus and a good number of other folks back in Europe at the time already knew the planet’s round.
Sometimes the existance of a majority simply means that all the fools are on the same side. Generally speaking, of course, some exceptions apply, void where prohibited, not valid in some states, one per household, points in this post may be larger than they appear, and we are not responsible in any of your belonging.
DaLovin’ Dj
Now this is novel - a generic, stand-alone pile-on!
What, it’s too much trouble to post your “me too’s” in the original threads? You have to create a meta-pile-on?
bizarre.
Don’t tell too many people, but I was quoting the song The Last Laugh from the musical Shall We Dance. It’s a jolly good song. Other lines include:
They all laughed at Rockefeller Center
Now they’re fighting to get in
They all laughed at Whitney and his cotton gin
They all laughed at Fulton and his steamboat
Hershey and his chocolate bar.
Ford and his Lizzie
Kept the laughers busy
That’s how people are
They laughed at me wanting you
Said it would be, “Hello, Goodbye.”
But oh, you came through
Now they’re eating humble pie
I did misquote though. It’s when Edison recorded sound.
“So ha, ha, ha! Who’s got the last laugh now?”
Gershwin. I heard it recorded by Michael Feinstein. Fun stuff.
Esprix
**There stands the raison d’etre of the Electoral College.
I <heart> Anatole France (as they say). He also said something like “The law, in all its magnanimity, forbids rich and poor alike, to sleep under bridges, to beg, or, to steal bread,” how devastatingly incisive is that?
Anyway…
Jodi in your response to my first post you said “If several people hold an identical and apparently rational opinion regarding your behavior.” (my italics) Well, this adds additional criteria to your original post, and in that case, I would say, why wait for several (or 20) apparently rational (opposing) opinions when just one should give one pause.
BTW, I do not estimate mass delusion or mass idiocy to be in the least bit improbable, in fact they are to be expected – a quick glance around the world to see how opinions can be locally polarised and homogenised might allow you to glimpse the kernel of truth in this apparent hyperbole. This perspective may colour my opinion somewhat.
On other matters, it was not I who suggested that this thread was motivated by the ambushed-monty trainwreck, you might have acknowledged that in your reply. In fact those qualified comments were merely an aside, I joined this thread to add my opposing opinion to your OP.
Just wait, they’ll be another 19 of us along any minute (holds breath).
Googolth SDMB foolish statement: I prefer sultanas.
I did that, because the OP mentioned posts in color and I had just come from one of those threads. Guess I was only partially right and this thread is really a meta-rant.
Can we agree (somewhat) that when often when 20 random people tell you that you are behaving like an ass, then perhaps they are on to something?
I’m not talking about anything on this board. But lately on another board I’m on I’ve seen people react so badly, so out of proportion to the subject at hand. Various people have been telling the particular idiot, “If you’d only tone it down here a bit, and if you’d stop rambling on and being so insulting (here’s a quote of where you called so-and-so a big jerk and a loser) and if you actually started to address the issue at hand, maybe we wouldn’t be calling you an asshole all the time.”
It isn’t so much the content of the discussion that was causing the problem, it’s the way that the person is generally behaving. How well they “play with others.” And when a bunch of people with diverse background and diverse approaches are telling someone that they are behaving like an ass (overreacting, being insulting, not paying attention to what other people are trying to say) then yeah, maybe they’ve got a point.
major hijack.
Actually, one of the current hypotheses (ooh, sorry! big word! 
) is the Columbus, like some other Italian cartographers, thought that the world was shaped like a breast, with the nipple part being the source of life (and possibly Eden). The nipple was where the Amazon is, and supposedly all the waters of the world flowed from that point. (I used to know the name of the cartographer, but it’s been a while since my Colonial literature class…)
[/hijack]
Well, aurelian, here’s another big word for you: Stupid. There are stupid hypotheses and informed hypothesis.
and don’t forget that people laughed at Bob Hope.