Let's name some SDMB posting 'moves'

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

@Green_Bean

**The Susanann: **Somebody asserts that nobody could have/could have had a certain personal experience. Many posters say that they have had that experience. The Susanann tells them that they are wrong.

That’s a good one. My favorite was the time she insisted it was impossible to meet a worthwhile man anywhere except a shooting range.

[Fotheringay-Phipps]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

The insert name of any of a couple of dozen posters here: claiming that something is self-evident and refusing to support it even after 10/20/50 people explain that it isn’t.

You can possibly name this after me - I’ve refused to support things that I consider self-evident (though I don’t recall it when 10/20/50 people claim it isn’t).

It’s a matter of interest. I’m generally uninterested in arguing about things that I consider self-evident, and even more uninterested in arguing with the type of people who dispute self-evident things.

So if, for example, I’m in some sort of argument and my end is somehow contingent on some assumption that I consider self-evident - say that it’s raining less than 50% of the time in NJ - and some guy comes along and claims it’s untrue, I am generally not going to be interested in digging up cites on this or in arguing about it altogether, or frankly in arguing with the type of person who would dispute this. So I move on.

@Giraffe

Those people are the worst! Always calling out other people for posting behavior they don’t like! It’s just disgusting. The only thing that could possibly make it worse would be if they dressed up their criticism in holier-than-thou sanctimony. That would be really annoying.

Thank goodness we don’t have any posters who do that.

Sorry if that touched a nerve there. Although, as I said, there’s a lot of competition for that title.

Though of course, there’s also the Former-Moderator-Still-Smarting-From-a-Current-Moderator-Smackdown type. That’s a much narrower category.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

@Fotheringay-Phipps

You can possibly name this after me - I’ve refused to support things that I consider self-evident (though I don’t recall it when 10/20/50 people claim it isn’t).

I don’t recall you ever being One Of Those People. I think maybe there have been ideological issues you’ve disagreed with people on and failed to cite but what could you possibly cite in support of a premise like “government has no business doing X”? And the “10/20/50 people” part is pretty key. If you say something is self-evident and only the person you are arguing with disagrees, you are probably dealing with a…

@Fenris

The Idiotic Cite request: Statement: People died in WWII. Response: You don’t know that for sure. Cite???

[ZipperJJ]

**“Here’s What’s Gonna Happen!” **

When someone pops in to a thread and declares that everyone on the Dope, always, every time there’s a thread with the specific topic, comes in and posts a specific response. Except I rarely see those actual responses - just references to them from the “Here’s What’s Gonna Happen!” posters. If I do see those particular responses, I rarely see them go un-opposed.

This particularly applies to threads about weight, smartphones, televisions/cable tv and guns.

[Lobohan]

The Clothahump: “Libs is 'tards because X”

On further inspection, X is shown to not be a true thing. In response stop posting in that thread.

[Crotalus]

@Fotheringay-Phipps

Though of course, there’s also the Former-Moderator-Still-Smarting-From-a-Current-Moderator-Smackdown type. That’s a much narrower category.

A former moderator got smacked down? Like he did something wrong and got righteously schooled about it? I would love to see a link to that. Or is it self-evident?

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

I’m thinking we need the Cartooniverse based on this thread; something along the lines of, “I saw [thing] which proves [thing which is clearly not susceptible to that type of “proof”]”.

[elucidator]

A former moderator got smacked down? Like he did something wrong and got righteously schooled about it? I would love to see a link to that. Or is it self-evident?

Do not meddle in the affairs of Mods, for they are subtle, and quick to anger.

[Lobohan]

@Ravenman

How did I forget the Magiver: it doesn’t matter what “facts” or “real experts in the field” say, I know better than all of them.

See, for example, his plan to air-drop motorcycles and an A-Team custom van into Benghazi within an hour of the shooting starting, despite the unanimous conclusions of military commanders and the Republican Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee that it was simply impossible.

Also see, moving two patients with Ebola to the US for treatment causing a risk of an outbreak, even though a plethora of doctors say there is no threat, and the fact that Ebola viruses have been present in the United States for decades.

Let’s not forget Magiver in the Could you knock out an enraged chimp thread.

He literally argues against the laws of physics.

[EmilyG]

There should be a name for the kind of poster who thinks that, when there are different ways of doing something, their way of doing a particular thing is the only correct way, and all others are BAD and WRONG. I’ve seen this with everything from pronouncing a word to the way you eat your cereal.

[VinylTurnip]

@elucidator

Do not meddle in the affairs of Mods, for they are subtle, and quick to anger.

Hey! No Vinnying!

[Fotheringay-Phipps]

@ZipperJJ

**“Here’s What’s Gonna Happen!” **

When someone pops in to a thread and declares that everyone on the Dope, always, every time there’s a thread with the specific topic, comes in and posts a specific response. Except I rarely see those actual responses - just references to them from the “Here’s What’s Gonna Happen!” posters. If I do see those particular responses, I rarely see them go un-opposed.

This particularly applies to threads about weight, smartphones, televisions/cable tv and guns.

Closely related to this group are the “someone’s gotta say it” group, who use this line as a cover for posts which are worn-out cliches and/or mildly offensive (e.g. “pics or it isn’t true!”).

[John_Mace]

@Fotheringay-Phipps

Closely related to this group are the “someone’s gotta say it” group, who use this line as a cover for posts which are worn-out cliches and/or mildly offensive (e.g. “pics or it isn’t true!”).

You know who else had to say it?

[leftfield6]

@Ravenman

How did I forget the Magiver: it doesn’t matter what “facts” or “real experts in the field” say, I know better than all of them.

See, for example, his plan to air-drop motorcycles and an A-Team custom van into Benghazi within an hour of the shooting starting, despite the unanimous conclusions of military commanders and the Republican Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee that it was simply impossible.

Also see, moving two patients with Ebola to the US for treatment causing a risk of an outbreak, even though a plethora of doctors say there is no threat, and the fact that Ebola viruses have been present in the United States for decades.

I endorse this descriptor of the facts denial maneuver.

Hope no one points out the absolutely useless maneuver of seconding something already stated.

(runs from room and hides)

[Giraffe]

@Fotheringay-Phipps

How about a term for people who try to compensate for their own inadequacies by constantly looking for others to mock, whether starting Pit threads dedicated to that purposes or just joining in when the pile-on seems well underway?

@Fotheringay-Phipps

Closely related to this group are the “someone’s gotta say it” group, who use this line as a cover for posts which are worn-out cliches and/or mildly offensive (e.g. “pics or it isn’t true!”).

Is there a name for posters who inadvertently do the exact thing they denounced on the previous page of the thread?

[Fotheringay-Phipps]

@Giraffe

Is there a name for posters who inadvertently do the exact thing they denounced on the previous page of the thread?

I don’t know, but before you devote your energy to coming up with one, maybe try for a name for posters who can’t distinguish between individuals and types.

[Jimmy_Chitwood]

There’s gotta be an aceplace for inflammatory questions in thread titles based on misapprehension of popular news stories.

And an etv for, you know. etving.

[VinylTurnip]

@Giraffe

Is there a name for posters who inadvertently do the exact thing they denounced on the previous page of the thread?

Careful. We’re at risk of being Fotheringay-Phippsed, and I don’t have the requisite supplies on hand: smelling salts, eyeball deglazing solution, cyanide pill…

[Jimmy_Chitwood]

The first two are more recommended than required.

[armedmonkey]

“Mirror, mirror on the wall”: The practice of quoting and replying to oneself in order to keep a waning thread alive.