Yeah, also not like Jim_B. He was an idiot (or played one), which Max_S is not, just emotionally stunted.
Max plays devil’s advocate more times than he should. Just because you can argue the other side, it doesn’t mean that you should. I do appreciate that he puts thought into his arguments, even though I rarely agree with them. I think he’s a far better contributor to the board then, say, squidbert.
Strong agree, and said as many words in the Troll forum.
As for Max, who self identifies as Chaotic Evil (per his own understanding of the definitions) in post 457, no amount of factual information which can be gained elsewhere on the internet is worth the inherent corruption of his philosophy.
Not that I think he’s specifically a troll exactly, but his affect is so low / abnormal as to render any meaningful debate on any subject outside of dry facts pointless.
So why deal with a demon in human skin (per his alignment) if you don’t have to.
But again, for what it’s worth, I think they’re honest; evil, sure, but honest. Which still means avoid if possible - not for being a troll, but for being a horrible human (?) being.
Max is alright it’s just that people have forgotten that where he posts the most contentiously is where you are supposed to post contentiously. A debate is a contest to convince another that one is right. Now, Max tends to be a predominantly logical debater which would be fine if humans were predominantly rational creatures. Which they most assuredly are not. But, that’s not a fault of Max. Or if it is a fault it’s not an ‘evil’ fault.
In classical discourse logic is recognized as merely a component with rhetoric being another major component. That’s where Max has a shortcoming in this particular space. His style antagonizes the participating audience and the antipathy generated is then transferred to his ideas as well even when his ideas are logically sound. I honestly think that logic should be the optimal approach in theory to convincing folks. Unfortunately reality doesn’t care what I think.
I don’t agree that Max’s long, dry posts are the issue. I see people make longer posts I don’t care to read all the time. They’re easy to scroll past.
It’s the fact that he says something that is wrong and seems smart enough to be able to understand an explanation for why it’s wrong, but is often (but not always) too stubborn to consider that he’s wrong. Sure, he admits fault on the details, but rarely will he consider that his entire premise is faulty.
This is just the exact sort of thing that Dopers find infuriating. It’s bad enough when it’s just political disagreement, or not taking advice given. But have someone actually be factually wrong and keep asserting they are correct, and it gets under our skin so badly. I actually started replies several times myself.
Why he's wrong
In this case, the entire premise that the right wing use of “woke” means “virtue signaling” is incorrect. Sure, they have some commonalities, both being pejoratives used to undermine progressive positions and rile up an angry base. And both terms may be used about the same act/person. But woke accuses people of “going too far” while virtue signaling accuses people of only saying things for popularity points.
Also, the term “virtue signaling” is not used primarily by the left, and was coined by the right, for the purposes of attacking the left. The left rarely uses it at all. Max claimed the opposite—despite having access to Google.
So, you also think that it is alright for things like anti-vaccination to thrive among the Republican base, just because they include it in the “woke” category?
Of course, it is ok, (/s) because some smart ones like you understand that Trump and many other leaders did not really mean that, no siree. Never mind that while you and Max understand, there is a lot of harm caused when very little or next to nothing is coming from conservative smart guys to counter the misinformation among the conservative followers. So, it is ok to let the base suffer the consequences. (Again, hard /s)
The point here is that efforts to dismiss the ongoing harmful additions to what “woke” means among conservatives is not logical, it is bananas. (and this is even worse when one considers the bigoted additions to the meaning of “woke” among conservatives)
His logic is awful in the first place like 90% of the time.
Has that ever been the case? Even in Greece 2500 years ago?
Debates are for the audience.
Indeed. In a structured debate, scoring is typically done by whoever was able to convince the judges. It’s not about convincing the other person you’re debating.
Just once, I’d love to see a presidential debate where one person finishes a point, and the other one says, “Okay, you win, you convinced me. You can be president.”
Unfortunately, in a non-structured debate like we have here, a fair amount of time is wasted on trying to convince the other of basic facts. Moderators moderate hostility and such, not baseless arguments.
A debate is meaningless if there is no common ground. And since there are no judges to declare a winner, some seem to think that they win once the other side has just given up.
But it’s still for the audience, i.e. readers. I will never, ever in a million years of providing cites, data, statistics or whatever convince Sam_Stone that Northern European social democratic politics is better, not only for the ‘working class’* but also for the capitalists.
But maybe I will sway one or two readers.
*Whatever that is in these days.
Yeah, when i argue on the internet, I’m only mildly interested in persuading the person I’m talking with. I’m more interested in the onlookers.
Yes, our labors would be largely futile, were it not for the (possibly imaginary) lurkers convinced by our brilliance.
I am not imaginary. And neither is my Canadian girlfriend.
I’ve changed a number of my perspectives and assumptions based on watching people argue with each other on this board.
I’ve changed a number of my perspectives and assumptions (and positions!) based on arguing with others on this board. That’s the reason I participate in the first place…
~Max
Purely out of curiosity and not having a dog in the race, might you give some examples?
A few from the top of my head,
~Max
Literally my favorite interaction in over two decades on this board.
Thank you for the answer.