Would you like a moderator to re-title this thread to something more appropriate-like “Look At Me!”
No, we should strive for honest and descriptive thread titles. “Fucking Moron Inside” should do nicely.
I take it you couldn’t find 10 examples?
Look, I’ve already had the ‘exhibitionist’ tag thrown at me, but it doesn’t really match up to the evidence. If all I wanted to do was get my name on the main page, I’m doing a far worse job of it than your accusations of trolling would seem to imply. If I was merely here for confrontation, why would I be discriminatory with who I respond to?
Laziness. Next!
It’s nothing to do with laziness. I think you are referring to your thought processes.
Oh, and that would be accurate…because you are in here!
I’m not sure that I think your intent is to troll. But, if you are gonna demand cites from people, you should probably provide some cites of your own. In this thread, you have asserted that:
- There are far more people in the world who do not eat dog than people that do eat dog
- The vast majority of the planet thinks that eating dog is morally wrong
- The culture in most parts of the world is to respect dogs
But, you have not provided any evidence that these are in fact true. Doing so would have probably helped significantly to convince people that you are not trying to be a troll. Just my two cents…
And a very valid 2 cents worth. I’ll admit the above points I made were all ‘guesswork’, or vague generalisations, and I accept that I’ve let emotion creep into my posts far too often… but I definitely can’t see how that equals ‘trolling’.
If I may. the trolling is displayed (or at least very effectively simulated to the point where the difference is trivial) by the following:
Base: You hold opinion A
[ul][li]You show hostility to people who question the accuracy of A[/li][li]You show hostility to people who question the significance of A[/li][li]Rather than acknowledge the flaws in A, you add increasingly tenuous justifications for A (“if you people think eating dogs is okay, why can’t we eat humans?”)[/li][li]You frequently respond with “I know you are, but what am I?”[/ul][/li]
I’ve offered this advice before with no effect, but no matter.
I’ll write a response to your premise with no personal rancor in it, just to see if you will or can respond in kind:
Certainly, dogs are viewed as pets and companions in many nations, but this is not universal. If intelligence is to be a determining factor, I submit that if dogs are too smart to be eaten, pigs have an even better claim for protection. If the animal’s personal appeal (or any other subjective standard) is to be a determining factor, I can only suggest that you not eat any animal you feel sympathy for and acknowledge that others will do the same. If they happen to have been raised with no particular regard for dogs (or at least a level of regard comparable to what westerners generally have for cows and chickens), then eating dogs will not seem at all unusual to them. Were you raised in such a culture, it is reasonable to assume you would feel the same way. Saying such attitudes are primitive (or attaching other negative labels) does not prove your case for you.
Is it OK for trolls to eat dog meat, ivan?
Ah, he’s passed the point of being annoying to just being uninteresting. That’s pretty much the worst thing you can do here.
Is there a circus in town? There seems to be a fair few clowns about!
If I recall correctly, the clowns are at the end of the circus parade, cleaning up the elephant shit.
If your post #208 asked a serious question, post #209 offered a serious answer, ivan. Are you going to respond to it?
Probably time to close this one down. Play nice for a while, and then light up another wreck like this one in a couple of weeks.
If you really need attention you could shorten that to one week. Most of the same kids will wander back in to feed you.
Typo Fix
[QUOTE=Bryan Ekers]
If I may. the trolling is displayed (or at least very effectively simulated to the point where the difference is trivial) by the following:
Base: You hold opinion A
[ul][li]You show hostility to people who question the accuracy of A[/li][li]You show hostility to people who question the significance of A[/li][/QUOTE]
Same thing, more or less. I seem to recall the hostility being started by the opposition, with phrases like “you’re an idiot”, “troll”, and “sub-moronic”, being those I responded in kind to. I also ignored a few posters who had made sly digs, which was very un troll-like, don’t you think? You’re welcome to disagree.
[QUOTE=Bryan Ekers]
[li]Rather than acknowledge the flaws in A, you add increasingly tenuous justifications for A (“if you people think eating dogs is okay, why can’t we eat humans?”)[/li][/QUOTE]
I’ve already had a variation on this thrown my way from ‘the opposition’, so what’s good for the goose, etc! “If people weren’t meant to be eaten, they wouldn’t be made of meat!”
[QUOTE=Bryan Ekers]
[li]You frequently respond with “I know you are, but what am I?”[/ul][/li][/QUOTE]
I don’t even know what that means!
Hey, don’t raise a sweat on my behalf.
I was wrong to call people primitives for eating dog. I actually meant those who eat it regularly for “medicinal purposes”, are akin to primitives. I hope that’s cleared up my stance a little?
http://wolf.ok.ac.kr/~annyg/report/index.html
Any of you could have provided one of the above links, and I would’ve had a far better understanding of the points you were trying to make, without anything getting personal. But instead you got all pissy about it and started coming out with your snide remarks and insinuations, trying to score petty little points. But cheers anyway, although it ain’t exactly been a pleasure.
If you haven’t tried to insult me, none of what I have typed above refers to you.
In the words of Dr Dogmeat;
In other words, “Fuck you, foreigner!”. And I’m the hostile one?
This response is the sort of thing that Bryan Ekers is talking about when he mentions “I know you are, but what am I?”. But even if you want to make the “what’s good for the goose, etc” argument, please remember that it was waaaay back in post #3 that you first made the parallel between eating dogs and eating humans. I don’t think you can take any serious stance that anyone else started the conversation down that road.
(links deleted, but only because they already appear in ivan’s post)
Thing is, you were clearly able to find those links pretty easily on your own. As such, there is no reason to complain that people here didn’t provide them for you. Really, if you wanted to have a civilized discussion, it would have been better for you to do the Google search before starting the thread.
I’m still not accusing you of being a troll, just offering insight into why people might be seeing it that way…
On preview-
But Dr. Dogmeat didn’t participate in this thread (unless he’s one of these posters, but I doubt it). In terms of the discussion here on the SDMB, you kinda were the one who turned hostile first, man… And even if you disagree regarding who turned hostile first, you could greatly up your cool factor at this point by helping to defuse the hostility, y’know?
Dude, we do see your point of view.
We also see other people’s point of view.
Bullshit.