Omnibus Trolls R Us Thread

[samclem]

@Morgenstern

Miller deleted it because the CIA threatened to give him a job managing an insane asylum if he didn’t.

Lateral move.

[digs]

@Skywatcher

DrDeth has been having odd notions again.

You have GOT to read through the first link. After dozens of shrill posts showing DrDeth’s almost-irrational fear of the Pit…

But you see, they have forced me (or others) to post in the Pit

rather than forcing them into the Pit.

you are forcing those that already posted in good faith there into the Pit.

thus your participation in the Pit has been forced on you.

thus you have been forced into participating in a Pit thread.

…I would tip the mods to have that thread moved…

[Darren_Garrison]

It is a slippery slope–posting the pit is a gateway towards using the word “an”!

[kayaker]

@digs

…I would tip the mods to have that thread moved…

I reported the OP, suggesting it be moved to the PIT.
Have you?

ETA: kudos to Fenris for the “WOOOOOSH” comment.

[kayaker]

@DrDeth

I dont 'think"* the Pit is somehow special * it* is*. It has special rules. It is the only place here where you can insult other posters.

Heh. People are subtly insulting him in his ATMB thread, he’s just too dim to realize it.

[Eonwe]

Really, haven’t we all just fallen into the pit?

[Lamoral]

Ace is now finding “hymens” on electrical outlets. Jesus, dude, get yer mind outta the gutter!

I guess when you’re a dick, everything looks like a pussy.

[Randolph]

Phipps is really hittin’ overdrive in the Mueller threads.

[VinylTurnip]

@Randolph

Phipps is really hittin’ overdrive in the Mueller threads.

“Look, kid, your enthusiasm is inspiring, and don’t think I don’t appreciate all the help— but seriously, take a break.”

— The Devil

[John_DiFool]

@Randolph

Phipps is really hittin’ overdrive in the Mueller threads.

Phippin’ weirds message boards.

[digs]

I get really frustrated with so many people taking F-P seriously (they actually debate his points like he’s making honest attempts to understand the facts).

But there was one response that brilliantly summed up what’s been so obvious:

@Richard_Parker

You aren’t making reasonable inferences from the evidence, which is what people do when they try to make a neutral decision. Instead, you’re arguing like a defense lawyer. That’s fine, but those of us trying to judge the evidence don’t have to sit in that posture.

Although I might call it the opposite of fine…

[John_Mace]

@Darren_Garrison

It is a slippery slope–posting the pit is a gateway towards using the word “an”!

Or referring to someone on TV by a nickname. :eek:

[Darren_Garrison]

@John_Mace

Or referring to someone on TV by a nickname. :eek:

Or by their character name.

[wolfpup]

@digs

I get really frustrated with so many people taking F-P seriously (they actually debate his points like he’s making honest attempts to understand the facts).

But there was one response that brilliantly summed up what’s been so obvious:

@Richard_Parker

You aren’t making reasonable inferences from the evidence, which is what people do when they try to make a neutral decision. Instead, you’re arguing like a defense lawyer. That’s fine, but those of us trying to judge the evidence don’t have to sit in that posture.

Although I might call it the opposite of fine…

That interpretation of F-P’s argument style is really much too kind. Making unreasonable inferences from the evidence is what F-P does in his rare periods of rational lucidity. The rest of the time, as I found out from trying to debate him on health care, the “evidence” he presents is either flat-out wrong or deceptively cherry-picked. It’s a lot like debating with a gun nut. The only thing that matters is that they win the argument. Even acknowledging inconvenient facts, let alone being swayed by them, is not in the cards.

[kayaker]

@John_Mace

Or referring to someone on TV by a nickname. :eek:

The book or the movie?!

[Sunny_Daze]

@kayaker

Heh. People are subtly insulting him in his ATMB thread, he’s just too dim to realize it.

Subtly? :dubious:

[John_Mace]

@Darren_Garrison

Or by their character name.

Shut up, Derwood.

[kayaker]

@Sunny_Daze

Subtly? :dubious:

Subtly enough to woosh right over his head!

[digs]

@kayaker

Subtly enough to woosh right over his head!

He must be pretty short; it smacked the rest of us right in the face.

[Gyrate]

@wolfpup

That interpretation of F-P’s argument style is really much too kind. Making unreasonable inferences from the evidence is what F-P does in his rare periods of rational lucidity. The rest of the time, as I found out from trying to debate him on health care, the “evidence” he presents is either flat-out wrong or deceptively cherry-picked. It’s a lot like debating with a gun nut. The only thing that matters is that they win the argument. Even acknowledging inconvenient facts, let alone being swayed by them, is not in the cards.

His approach to the Trump investigations basically boils down to:

1. A snowflake melts at the slightest touch.
2. Avalanches are made up of snowflakes.
3. Therefore, avalanches will melt at the slightest touch.

If he can just find some minor quibble with as many elements of the investigation as possible, this will magically render the entire thing insubstantial. poof

It doesn’t make him a troll. It does make him look increasingly desperate, however.