Omnibus Trolls R Us Thread

Usenet is just a distributed-store protocol. The alt. groups can be pretty wild, but there are moderated NGs that could work as well as the SDMB but with multiple hosts. Also, it is pretty hard for trocks to disguise themselves.

I must have missed your subsequent post where you apologized for behaving like a rude asshole to somebody who was perfectly civilly trying to contribute responses to your question.

I should just ask you to let it go, but clearly you can’t.

You know, if we were having a beer and I asked a question and your first two responses were

1> “Your premise is wrong”
2> “You’re wrong, but I don’t have time to explain why now”

That’s the point I’d go

“Dude, stop telling me I’m wrong and start telling me WHY I’m wrong.”

But hey, thanks for still being so butt-hurt about it four hours later that you have to bring it up again here. I might have actually apologized if you weren’t so busy insulting me in this thread.

I didn’t say either of those things, but in any event you are conveniently omitting the part that soon afterwards (having been unable to find the prior relevant thread that I had told you I was looking for) I took the time to write out a lengthy explanation that I thought might be helpful. And yet you continued doubling down on your inexplicably hostile attitude even after I had taken the time to do that.

You were mod noted twice for your attitude, and every single person who has looked at that thread disagrees with you.

Care to reflect on any of that, and whether it’s really me who has the problematic attitude here? Obviously I only just noticed you calling me an asshole in this thread too, which is why I responded now. You had ample opportunity to apologize in the interim, and had not done so.

It makes little difference to my life whether you apologize, but if you care about your reputation, an apology is certainly warranted.

No, because I’m obviously an unhinged psychopath, my entire posting history to the contrary. :rolleyes:

Your attitude today was unhinged. We all have bad days. Most of us get a grip sooner or later, realize we were being assholes and apologize. It’s your choice.

Only one person here has been acting like a “fucking arrogant asshole”.

Wa…was it me?

Get a room.

Yes, SNF, it was. None of us wanted to say anything, but now that you have named the elephant in the room, I think we all feel better.
Maybe not you, but the rest of us do.

Very good then.

:beer:

I honestly thought this discussion was long since over, but since apparently it isn’t and I see from subsequent posts that you just can’t let it go, I’m going to make a couple of observations.

And my first observation is, wow, “unbalanced psychopath”, eh? Nice. :rolleyes: I myself don’t pull any punches in calling someone out in the Pit when I feel they deserve it, but in this case I frankly think you’re going a little overboard.

I basically agree with the gist of the previous comments that you’re a generally informed and valued poster here. I also acknowledge that the nature of the question – the nature of the universe that spun out of the Big Bang – is very much non-intuitive, because we cannot intuitively grasp the concept of space and time being created. It’s therefore appropriate to point out that the premise of the question as it was posed was fundamentally flawed. And you did, ultimately, provide some good insights, as did some other responders, although they did it with much less drama.

What I will say in Chimera’s defense is that it took you four posts to get beyond what was essentially saying “your question is stupid because you just don’t understand the basics”. That isn’t really helpful, and no one else kept hammering away, as you did, on how fundamentally wrong the OP’s ideas were. Even in your fourth and first actually informative post, you still had to end it with how the OP needed to correct his misconceptions or he’ll just never understand it.

These may seem nitpicks on matters of expository style, but you were the only one doing it. And while I think Chimera overreacted, I have indeed noticed a dismissive “you know nothing” undercurrent in many of your responses in other threads, and a tone of hostility when challenged, kind of like what we just saw here where someone who criticized your atittude is suddenly an “unbalanced psychopath”. Or I could cite the sneering hostility in this post, for example, and this one. There are lots of examples. I’ve had a few run-ins with you myself, mostly regarding your linguistic and cognitive dogmas culled from Pinker and Pullum, so it’s familiar territory.

You remind me of the type who joins Mensa just to get the lapel pin, and then makes a point of always wearing it so that when he gets into an argument – on any subject – he can emphatically clear his throat and point to it.

Don’t worry about that. I took the liberty of assigning Sunny Daze to sort them into their proper categories. I’m sure she’ll do fine. :smiley:

:eek: Jesus, somebody write that dude a Greasemonkey script to simulate dice rolls so he can generate our responses to him. That’ll save him the trouble of posting…

wolfpup, you and I have had plenty of run-ins in the past in discussions of language, which I’m certainly not going to re-litigate here; and in some of which I lost my patience with you, and may well have deserved pitting. That’s hardly relevant to the thread under discussion here, and I’m sorry but I don’t regard your analysis of the current situation as unbiased, given our history as antagonists. The Mod concerned in the GQ thread doesn’t agree with your view, nor did any other contributors to that thread.

I responded patiently in the original thread to unwarranted hostility and rudeness. “Unhinged psychopath” was a response to a ridiculous pit double-down (I can’t let it go?) in which I was called a “fucking arrogant asshole” and various other things for no reason whatsoever. If you bring something to the pit like that and call someone an asshole, you can’t seriously object to some hyperbolic pushback.

In any event - you and I may butt heads on linguistics, but you’re certainly a good and thoughtful poster on many other subjects, and I hope you feel the same way about me. I value your opinion on many matters, albeit not as a character witness for me.

Indeed, the Right have told time and again people to be anti-socialists, but now socialist is a little too long word for their supporters and now they’re all anti-socials. So yes, thanks, Obama.

This guy just popped into the current thread on transsexuals to inform us that homosexuals and transgenders are “aberrant”, not that he in any way holds any negative views about either group, mind you, but it’s true because that’s what “aberrant” means and anyone who says different is “substituting their own facts”.

Man, it’s a good thing he doesn’t actually hold the views he’s repeatedly espousing or he’d be a real jerk.

I don’t have a dog in this fight, and I’m not sure if you and I have ever interacted, but the posts quoted by wolfpup, and your response here to them seem to be the veritable definition of “smarmy.”

Isn’t Riemann British? I’ve often said, even of my dear British friends, that when they speak they often sound as if there is an implied “you ignorant fool” at the end of every sentence. At least they sound that way to my American ear. I cut them some slack since they’re a product of their culture. :slight_smile:

You know, it’s a damn shame, but the Irish got all the humor, all the pretty women and of course, most of the good ale. The British and the Scots got nothing but kilts and stiff noses. Frankly, I think that’s why God detached Ireland and moved it so far from away from England and Scotland when he was making the world.

Yes, apparently routine use of the word “whilst” is the biggest giveaway.

I will have to work on my smarminess. I was attempting to be conciliatory toward wolfpup, since I probably should have tried to clear the air much earlier. I’ve told him to stick his prescriptivism where the sun don’t shine in the past, in a manner that was probably not my finest moment.