Welcome to the Dope, by the way. I’m honored that you selected me, out of all these thousands of people, as your orientation mentor.
Okely dokely. But I refuse to join in your pile-on of What Exit. 
Me, I wish I actually could. Until then, I’ll have to be satisfied with what I believe, rather than what I know. This post of yours, however, shows the subtle misrepresentation of what others claim that leads me to believe you lack integrity; with this example, I’ll bow out of the thread.
Daniel
“Attention whore” is not a capital offense, but when coupled with other non-capital offenses, you start wondering just how worthwhile a messageboard participant is. When coupled with other offenses, villification is justified.
You seem to be fixated on one of the accusations (attention whore), while ignoring the other charges (meanness, extreme sensitivity, general craziness, etc.) that have been levied against him.
Oh, really? Well I put it to you that ‘any reasonable person’ should have understood that Liberal said in that post exactly what he said he said; that the OP’s opinion of a smelly customer will matter little to that customer.
What followed was a lot of people failing to understand what he wrote, and yet another ludicrous pile-on.
I wonder whether the problem with understanding what he writes is a result of confirmation bias; in effect, since people are determined to believe he’s evil, they see evil in all he does even when there’s none to be seen to the disinterested observer. Which would be me. 
Listen, Yoda, I’m glad you’re so evolved that you’ve fully transcended your baser instincts, but some people still succumb to the evils of irritation and annoyance. And not just annoyance at an inelegantly constructed argument, but actual annoyance at another person. (I’ll give you a moment in case you’ve swooned at this point.) I’m sure it would be best if everyone swallowed their feelings deep down inside and focused only on a pleasant, logical exchange of ideas, but it’s still a mite unrealistic at this point.
So rather than tsk-tsking at the uncouth savages who stoop to confront those whose behavior annoys them, why not just avoid reading the threads where such savage displays take place? You’ll find we’ve made this easy for you by collecting them all in one easy-to-avoid forum.
Who, exactly, is the Grand Poohbah Arbiter of That Which Constitutes Offense?
So you are actually trying to make a case for abusing someone because you have deemed that person’s behaviour to be ‘offensive’. Lovely, that.
Have you read what you wrote? Because I’m hoping you’re :smack: now. Oooh, he’s a meanie! I’ve yet to see it despite checking out all the proffered ‘proofs’. Oooh, he’s ‘extremely sensitive’. And this is a problem for you, personally, because? ‘Oooh, he’s generally crazy’. So tell me who put you in charge of eugenics. Even assuming all the things you said were correct, how does that give you leave to be abusive? Where do people get the idea that not liking someone gives them leave to behave like boors towards the person they dislike?
At this point, I’m going to bow out of the thread. Because I can’t believe the bolded interpretation of Liberal’s post. And if you do believe this, we have no common ground to work from.
See you in future threads.
So?
Again, so?
Why? One of my goals in life is to persuade people to treat each other better. Do you argue that it’s a good thing that people get irritated and attack each other? Do you not think we might all be a bit better off if we enjoyed pleasanter emotions and general good-will? Is not the point of the Pit to be a place where people disagree? Well, I disagree with the idea that people are just going to be nasty so I should pretend to not notice. You know that thing about where nobody speaks out when they see wrong until everybody’s gone?
I think it’s a shame that people get themselves into a lather over things that don’t matter that much, particularly when, and I can’t stress this strongly enough, it damages their own health. Because I’d like to see people in general happier, I’ll continue to argue for changing attitudes and behaviour to the positive.
And it’s not that big a deal to be ‘evolved’, if that’s what you want to call it. Read buddhism. Read the Dalai Lama. Read Albert Ellis. You have handbooks right there - you can do this. Makes for a much pleasanter life, I promise, than allowing yourself to get all riled up about things which are, in the great scheme of life, inconsequential.
Yeah, actually, you could. You just don’t want to.
[kind of a hijack]
Quiddity, I’m going to go out on a limb and ask: Are you a Buddhist? If so, I’m getting where you’re at right now, totally. But I often find, personally, the ‘‘people are responsible for their own reactions’’ concept is a hard sell to people who are not Buddhist or who do not have personal philosophies influenced by Buddhism (or Ellis, as the case may be.) Hell, sometimes it’s a hard sell to myself, because sometimes you just get pissed and feel righteously justified in being pissed. I think that is part of my conflicting feelings as to the nature of this thread. I believe, deep down in my heart and soul, that this kind of shit does not have to happen between people. But on the other hand, others find alternative ways to live happy lives, which may or may not include the personal philosophy of non-attachment. Even setting the issue of spirituality aside, not everyone needs people like Ellis in their lives to tell them to get rational and quit complaining. It just depends on the person.
Which is why, despite my personal life perspective, I have trouble getting angry at anyone in this thread for what amounts to very human reactions. Some people are involved because they have been very hurt–some are involved because they enjoy slinging mud and don’t think message board vitriol should be considered painful or hurtful… there’s an entire spectrum of motivation and emotion here.
This is part-ways why upon reading about the background history I felt so unable to connect with what I was feeling myself. I’m the kind of person, if someone says something mean to me on a message board, it can ruin my day. But I respect not everyone is like that, and seeing the wars that get started here and the inevitable return to normalcy that generally follows has changed my perspective on whether all negativity is damaging all the time. Furthermore, it would be hypocritical of me to attack people for attacking others when the Pit is my favorite forum to frequent (schadenfreude-licious!) Obviously I enjoy it on some level too, else I wouldn’t be here.
So that’s something I do struggle with. We’re not talking about people standing in a parking lot drawing knives… we’re talking about words on a message board. Surely words can hurt, especially when the individual is vulnerable in the first place (raises hand.) But words can also instruct and edify and teach–even angry words can do this, even insults can do this. That’s a lesson I’ve learned from the SMDB in my short time here. Just because people argue does not mean the world is going to explode. It means people are human. I’ve certainly grown a coat of thicker skin since arriving, and I celebrate being able to come here for my daily intellectual ass-kicking. In a way, it’s mental preparation for real life.
Having examined the threads presented and the history of this thing with Liberal, I admit I have difficulty hating him. He seems to be pretty up-front about his personal flaws and the kind of person who wants to make things right with those he hurts unintentionally. I agree with the assessment upthread that his beliefs and ideas are inconsistent with those of many Dopers but that he follows them consistently. And if he did change his story for the $500 prr deal, I wouldn’t fault him for it. My best interpretation of those events were that he made an offhand comment/insult, prr challenged it, it pissed him off and so he followed through–something he regrets only insofar as it has made him more of a target on this board (Liberal feel free to correct me, just my interpretation based on reading the thread.) Of course, I’m just going by the few cited threads, but I get the impression that overall, he is quite sincere, and if he says the pile-ons hurt him, then I believe it. I also believe that everyone who hates him does so because they have been hurt and don’t agree with me. That’s fine too. I respect every individual here and honor their feelings in the matter.
Having said that… Can’t we all just get along?
D & R
Yeah, I know that thing – I went to college where a lot of people smoked pot. Give it up. If sanctimonious twats like you were able to affect any sort of meaningful change beyond making themselves feel superior, they would have done it already.
I say this without any personal rancor or malice: you are unbelievably annoying. Please fuck off, already.
aw come on, you could at least offer 'em a buck or 500.
What I don’t understand about these kinds of threads is that there’s always a lone poster standing up to a diverse assemblage of posters. These posters have had varied histories with Liberal, ranging from knock-down-drag fights to calm, rational debates. And always the Lone Defender thinks these people are all big meanies who are too stupid or uncouth to “get” Liberal.
The Lone Defender never admits Liberal’s sins.
The Lone Defender never concedes that Liberal’s foes have very intelligent reasons for disliking him.
Usually, the Lone Defender is a marginal poster. Someone who doesn’t really have much of a board persona, someone who hasn’t made much of a splash–good or bad. They often come across as weak and obsequious, like they think by defending, however poorly, a long-timer like Liberal, they’ll score some cool points around here.
It never works. Just ask Starving Artist.
I’m going to bow out too because I think my posts are contributing to the attack against Liberal, which I don’t want to do as I think he has shown improvement.
Get over yourself. You don’t come off all that transcendent or evolved. You seem a right douche who’s gotten himself into a full lather in a pit thread about someone else, having posted 39 posts (five more than the pittee and far more than the OP). People dislike Liberal not because he holds controversial points of view - that is way too easy a cop out and if you thought about it for a moment, I’m sure you’d see why it doesn’t hold any water - but for how he expresses his points of view.
You’ve been hypocritical, myopic and obtuse (see, e.g., your use of multiple posters supporting the OP as both evidence of an unfair personal attack and as evidence of the justness of the OP, depending on the circumstances, your explanation to the contrary notwithstanding. See also your obtuse attempt to argue “Why get all het up over pixels on a screen?” argument and your own clear emotional investment in this thread alone, as well as your excusing Liberal for routinely getting himself het up over pixels on a screen). If being hypocritical, myopic and obtuse are Bhuddist qualities, I’ve gotten a complete misunderstanding of Bhuddism over the years.
As to the idea that Liberal is self-reflective and interested in personal growth and change, one who is interested in change tends to actually demonstrate some sort of change. If saying it makes it so, then I would suggest that Starving Artist is also a good example of someone interested in personal growth and change.
Look, you can believe that Liberal is routinely the center of drama because he is an innocent lamb regularly set upon by wolves if you want to. I tend to think that a better characterization of the process is “Wherever you go, there you are.”
Yeah, hell, you think I’m easy or something? 
and, on topic, a message to ** Lib**. I think you were/are best served when you self exile from the pit. written words on a screen seem to at times cause you damage. sarcasm, irony, intent aren’t easily discerned on line. you can choose to remain in the forums where personal attacks are not allowed.
I don’t know if you still respect me or my opinions, but there it is.
So?
Well, if these people are the sorts to impute motivation to others, as you have just done, then I and the other Lone Defenders are quite right to ignore their opinions. I did not say, nor do I think, that posters are ‘stupid or uncouth’.
Translation: people don’t all agree that this guy is a ‘sinner’. So? You’re trying to argue for group-think as some sort of logical means of persuasion. It’s not.
That which may constitute ‘intelligent’ to you may not necessarily do so to me. I agree that they may follow a thought process that leads them to believe they are being ‘intelligent’ about it, but I also think that those processes could be deconstructed and proven to be simply matters of opinion.
What am I, ‘weak and obsequious’ or ‘sanctimonious’? You can’t have it both ways And thanks for imputing motive yet again. I really don’t have much respect for that. You are dead wrong.
This seems to me to be very well intended, probably fairly perspicacious, and certainly very reasonable advice.
And while “vilification is justified” is a very hard statement to just leave lying there, I think I will leave it lying there, in its own fragrance.
C’mon Wring, lets go argue childcare, or politics, or something easy.
bye
Tris
HERself, thanks.
Well I posted one remark and people started responding to me, and I answered back. I could just be rude and not reply, I suppose.
Well, different people have presented different reasons for disliking him. Are you the spokesman?
Well, I guess I could have posted a multi-page essay on my philosophy, and post extensive explanations for each thing I write, however I give people (apparently wrongly) for understanding. I explained, I clarified, and you tell me I don’t think what I think. :smack:
Funny, that. So you figure the Dalai Lama should just sit down and shut up rather than going around the world speaking to people about how to develop ‘warm hearts’? Please go tell him so if you do.
Um. Ok. Not seeing anything really useful there, but if you’re happy with that, so be it. I always thought it was a kind of cute and fun saying, it’s true.
sounds good to me. I’ll bring the wine.