This is to the many folks over in the Charlie Kirk pit thread who cannot stop replying to obvious troll/sealion. Stop replying and my guess is he will go away.
I find that whole process weirdly interesting. I was tempted myself to reply at first but soon there was a steady stream of nibbles on that bait and I wisened up.
I honestly want to understand better those that defend Charlie Kirk. From what I have seen the man was reprehensible, but admittedly, I haven’t sat through much of his dialogue. I don’t see anything of substance in this guys responses other than attacks and counter attacks.
It really is a pointless waste of time. The many hostile and/or attacking responses do nothing to help. The more reasoned responses are treated the same as the emotional ones. Its hopeless.
Yeah, but they’ll crow over “HAHA YOU RAN AWAY!”, and we just can’t have a stranger getting undue satisfaction on the internet, let alone the Dope.
It makes perfect sense when you consider that the right wing is all about “rules for thee, but not for me”. They believe in absolute free speech…for them. Not for the rest of us.
Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.
You might well want to. But responding to a sealion is not a way to obtain that honest understanding.
I know you get that, but it’d also be nice if everybody else got that idea too.
I just replied to that troll. Sorry, please forgive me!
And now SpiceWeasel has summoned DemonTree to the Male Inequality thread. Whether in misguided good faith or to bait that bigot into violating her topic ban, I do not know.
As someone who knew very little about Charlie Kirk before the shooting, I wanted to understand him better, too, and to that end I watched a lot of YouTube videos featuring him in various different settings, from the mass rallies on college campuses to one-on-one debates and interviews. I’ve talked about it in other threads and this isn’t the place to go into it, but I do understand why he was so divisive and so beloved by one side and hated by the other. He was smart and articulate but also a manipulative lying demagogue, so he was a very effective influencer for the far right.
But the former in no possible way offsets the latter.
To all: Please don’t use this thread to talk about Charlie Kirk.
- post deleted, respect to @What_Exit
One more try.
@Mighty_Mouse, I wouldn’t think it was baiting on Spices part. She probably didn’t realize the topic ban.
That thread doesn’t play into her topic ban anyway. If she violates her ban there, it would also be a hijack.
Hey, since you’re here WhatExit.
Why are you wanting folks to not talk about Kirk in certain threads?
You shut me down in a thread with Kirk’s name in the title. I respect that, of course and won’t go back. In fact I’ve muted those threads completely. And now here.
Are you tryna contain it to other threads?
I don’t get it.
Not complaining. Just asking.
Troll thread, this thread and the major hijacking of a Jimmy Kimmel thread that I had been following. But that last request was just as an annoyed poster. This and the Troll thread, I try to keep from blowing up into a hijack of other subjects.
Understood. Thx for the reply.
Just make it a moderator request ffs, otherwise all your pleadings and hand wringing get passed over.
I think @What_Exit was rightfully respecting moderation boundaries. In this forum, @Miller is the one with final say. But I agree with the sentiment. Threads like this are too easily hijacked. For my part, I made a brief comment about Charlie Kirk in response to the subject of wanting to know more about him, and didn’t intend to hijack or pursue the subject any further here.
Miller has a hands off approach whereas WE likes to stick a thumb in all the pies.