Context is one thing, but six weeks is hardly necessary. I agree that contextless quotes can be worthless, but transcripts generally do the trick.
Out of curiosity, what did you mean by “preselected”?
In any case, I’m not particularly interested in debating whether or not Rush Limbaugh is a blowhard. I am interested in debating why you thought the vast majority of the SDMB wouldn’t think that. Do you spend any time here at all?
No. He wasn’t. He did not ask me what I was doing. He asked if satirical threads were allowed in GD. So, his first gambit was not so much a true question as a rhetorical characterization of my thread as a violation of board rules. Getting no response to this first junior modding attempt, he opened this thread.
Yes, it’s a good thing I checked and didn’t just beleive you.
I see. And by recent, did that occur this year, or last year? Could you link to what you refer to?
I did specifically say that I made a New Year’s Resolution and you can hardly call bullshit if your example is from last year.
That’s a fair criticism of me, though I beleive your example is from last year. I’ve been working pretty hard at it this year, as I’ve said.
Again, please reread the post. If you wish to call bullshit, you’ll need examples from this year which is where I’ve claimed to be kinder and gentler.
I thought his argument and the way he made it was clever and correct, making a good point concerning the usage of a very common fallacy concerning a very important topic, so I thought I’d share it and see how it did here in a less friendly environment.
I think it did pretty well, and his point has held up.
This doesn’t address what I was saying at all.
The point of the criticism isn’t that you posted an argument by Rush in an unfriendly environment. It’s that you did it in a disingenuous way, designed to prevent or at least delay debate on the real topic. Remember? You then argued that anyone should have seen the real topic for what it was. I replied that people were less likely to dig into Rush’s deeper motives and just assume he was being a blowhard – a reasonable assumption, or at the very least, an entirely predictable reaction.
Since your characterization of my argument is false I can’t answer your question.
Well, that makes perfect sense. Since we disagree about the nature of your OP, you can’t possibly answer the question of why you thought people wouldn’t just take Rush at face value. I’d like to subscribe to your newsletter (or perhaps you have a radio program of some sort?).
It’s really not rational for you to disagree with me over what I meant. I know and you don’t.
If we are starting from the stance that you are going to tell me what I mean rather than vice-versa why bother to ask me any questions at all?
Whatever I answer, you will likely just tell me what I mean.
This process of yours doesn’t really require my input.
How about you be the judge of what you meant, but we can all be the judge of the effect? Sound fair? If it helps us avoid this red herring, you can rephrase my previous comment to “…the effect of the design was to…”
ETA: It occurs to me that your last comment might have been referring to whether you thought people would not take Rush at face value. If so, since you stated it earlier in the thread, I figured it was safe to assume it was true.
And Scylla: you were saying to **RTF ** that “**your first reaction ** to my thread was to post a formal accusation of trolling in the pit”
I thought that in context it was going to be obvious (yeah, Rush style greatness there 
)that his post #13 was really his first reaction, you were not being truthful in your reply to him.
No. That doesn’t work either. Who elected you spokesman?
I confess the error.
What part of “*we *can *all *be the judge” don’t you understand?
Am I being whooshed?
I’m not finding this exchange any more rewarding than you are.
You’re original question was:
I’ll reanswer:
Contrary to your statement I did not think that. It was not a concern of mine. It did not enter into the equation.
Man, speaking of not understanding context. That’s a doozy.
And yet your words in post #71, while not actually including the words “RTFirefly, you’re being an immature coward”, have basically filled up all the space around those words leaving a hole in that exact shape. In a very civil manner, if not a completely decent one. So hooray for the kindler, gentler Scylla, but boo to Scylla the scold, who seems to feel the need to come down from a perch to let us bask in his wisdom.
My comment about condescension, earlier? This ties back into that, because you’re not here to teach us how to be brave or mature. And you also don’t have any moral authority to scold RTFirefly. You haven’t earned it.
Actually, it was my second.
My first (and similar first reactions by others) having been ignored, it seemed to me that the question I raised here was the only real question on the table, because you weren’t owning up to spoofing or whatnot.
And sind this forum is the only one that we can raise the question of trolling in, that’s where I raised it.
You don’t think the thought was in anyone else’s mind? Then why not get it out on the table in front of everyone?
Nothing wrong with confronting someone in front of other concerned parties.
You’re quite confused. I didn’t call you a name. I accused you of engaging in an activity. I didn’t call you a troll, because I’d never known you to troll before. But the original thread - well, it was hard to see what daylight there was between it and trolling. So I asked you whether you were, and why I should think you weren’t.
You and I have been here for quite a few years. “RTFirefly” may not be as real as my flesh-and-blood self, but he’s pretty real at this point. Consequences to my online persona are consequences I suppose I can leave behind, but given that I’ve been RTFirefly for nearly 8 years now, it’s clear that I’m in no hurry to do so.
I wouldn’t, because it would spoil everyone else’s time.
But if you’re at Gettysdope, I frankly won’t have much to say to you, because I don’t keep real and online IDs in separate boxes. If you’re a jerk online, I’ll be cordial but not friendly if we meet IRL. Because I already know a ggood deal about what you’re like, and I don’t have much to say to the RL person that could spawn the online ID I know as Scylla.
Besides, I’ve already said what I had to say right here. Why should I resurrect the issue some months hence?
Let me add this: having been to a fair number of Dopefests between 2000 and now, one can think of them as basically MPSIMSy events, with occasional forays into IMHO or GD.
I’m not going to be the first person to bring the Pit into a Dopefest, thankyewverymuch.
You did and I quoted you directly belove. “Pathetic dipshits” I beleive was the term.
Exactly my point. If you act one way towards people on the internet and another way in person than your behavior is, by definition, two-faced. By that same token if you’re aggressive, confrontational and willing to throw insults around that you wouldn’t in real life, than I think it’s pretty clear that you are a coward.
In person, it’s not your choice.
That’s what makes it cowardly and two-faced here.
Uh oh, Scylla’s huffin’ and puffin’ this time around. RT, best go to the Dopers gathering (or should I say, pissing contests?) a lá Brave McCain in Baghdad. Couple of hundred of your closest friends, fully armored Hummers a plenty and a few overhead choppers to boot.
For The Mighty Silly, CIC of the SDMB’s wingnut keyboard brigade, no doubt puts the Iraqi resistance to shame all by his lonesome.
Hell, Iraq would be over and done with has he chosen to enlist. Guess he felt the American kids needed the real life training – and the butchering that goes along with it.
Can’t say that I blame him for picking his fights at Doper gatherings instead.
Be advised tough. This not just ANY man you’re facing. It’s Silly The Great – and PO’d no less!
If I were you I’d be having nightmares from now until said fateful day. “Meet My Maker” kind of stuff.
:::shudder:::
PS-Bring a cutman and a first-aid crew as well.
Sorry, you’re right. I was thinking of “troll.” I was actually thinking of a whole bunch of our lesser posters here lately about the ‘pathetic dipshits’ bit, hence the plural. But yes, you’re included.
It’s called realizing I’m not the only person in the world that matters.
It’s called “being pissed at Scylla, but being man enough to keep my personal feelings in check so I don’t spoil everyone else’s party.” Apparently you can’t say the same.
I don’t know why you wish to make a mess of GettysDope, but I’m not planning on cooperating with your plans to sabotage it. Finis, end of story.
That you would be willing to raise the tensions around this event just to satisfy your personal grievances says more about you and your general self-centeredness and worthlessness as a human being than you can apparently imagine.
Calling you a ‘pathetic dipshit’ is quite frankly an insult to the other pathetic dipshits.