Thanks. I was afraid my Fairytale Kingdom suggestion would go unappreciated.
New thread started in Great Debates. I thought it was a fun topic, too.
Interesting…
Not so much. I’m a 20 year member although I don’t post much anymore.
I was just feeling kindly toward a guy that I know from another message board who posts a lot about his pet political interest but never gets much, if any, response to his posts. I pointed out that I hear his complaints about governance a lot but that I don’t see him talk much about the alternative(s) he is promoting and encouraged him to bring that discussion here where I knew he would likely find an interested audience and conversation.
The guy is older, seems kind of lonely, is not unintelligent, and seemed to be someone who would enjoy a good discussion. He likes photography too and is a very amateur photographer.
Anyway, I referred him here and did let him know there were some rules. I’m pretty sure he didn’t read them as he signed up, started posting right away, and then was quickly banned for “trolling”. He doesn’t “troll” at the other place I see him.
Another poster pointed out that he may not be aware of the implications of “trolling”. From what I know of him, this seems likely to me.
Was his argument good? No. Absolutely not. But I thought the SDMB could help him define are refine his thoughts- like it did for me since long ago. The thread he started was exactly what I’d hoped he would find: interested, intelligent folks defining and/or helping him to define the words, definitions, and parameters of the discussion, then other interesting references, and also supports and challenges to his proposal (weak as it was).
I told him I would see if I could get him un-banned. I tried. If SDMB doesn’t want him back, that cool with me. I personally think he got off on a bad foot by not familiarizing himself with the culture and rules here before diving in head-first. That’s entirely on him.
I do think he would be a good fit here- IF he would familiarize himself with the culture and rules of the SDMB.
His problem was spewing his schtick in this thread. Had he just kept it over in the other thread, he probably would have been fine. At least for another day or two.
I don’t disagree.
Nothing meant by my comment other than that it was an interesting development in the saga of the new poster, especially in light of the accusations of trocking.
I feel that there are many times on this board where we “want” to have posters who disagree, but at the same time, new posters who may disagree or be from another background are baited, baited, baited until they go nuts, resulting in a ban. It’s not uncommon here.
Be honest. It doesn’t take a lot of bait.
The real problem is that online discourse in general is a fucking wasteland. Few and far between are places where you can actually engage in reasonable, reasoned debate because people have learned they can usually unleash their inner asshole online with no consequences. And, despite being slightly better than the norm, this is true here as well for many posters.
And for the worst offenders, they don’t even care. They deliberately engage in that sort of behavior because they actually don’t care and don’t have to worry about anybody knowing their “real” identity. So, the default behavior for nearly everybody is to act like a dillweed, i.e. the Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory. And who was the fucking patience to teach people better, when they should already know it themselves but have been conditioned to believe they don’t have to follow even the barest essentials of civil human discourse when online?
Especially for those who are nutty to begin with.
And the Dope does contain a lot of master baiters.
Ooo, almost forgot. Thanks for reminding me.
brb …
Please, take your time.
And please, wash your hands.
Best not mention this on your application for the Proud Boys.
Props to troll of the hour Velocity, who’s got atheists arguing over the preferred nature of a god and an afterlife (if any—of course we have to assume the former if we want to comment at all, lest we get accused of threadshitting) that none of us believe in:
Well, I don’t know, I concede that Velocity is one of the masters of JAQing off at this board, always closely skirting around trolling, but this is one of his subjects that maybe presents an interesting hypothetical that could make for a worthwhile thread. He’s done much worth. But I haven’t read the whole thread and only his OP, maybe he got worse later in the thread. But then, mostly he doesn’t even return to his JAQing threads.
Correction: He’s done much worse. A small typo, but a decisive distinction.
Alternatively, I could have gone along with “he’s done much that is worthless”.
I just really, really hate threads where the OP is a clear effort to abuse the “no threadshitting” rule to force people who would tend to take issue with the OP in some respect if they could discuss it openly to either (a) stay out, (b) accept a ridiculous proposition at face value and just roll with it, or (c) invite a warning. Bonus points when it gets people who hold a view distinct from the OP’s to argue amongst themselves, rather than focus on debunking bullshit claims elsewhere.
@Velocity really is this forum’s apex troll in my book. I’m even willing to risk him seeing this and taking that as a compliment.
There are 2 or 3 others sharing the medal platform with @velocity. I’d name names but don’t want to give them the satisfaction. Sure do hate the highjacking and dragging every topic around to their narrow self serving indignant pet peeves though.