Having looked at the thread @scudsucker linked, that’s pretty much what they did. Called out ColdBrew but as it was something of a hijack of the MSPSIMS thread, brought it here to stop the hijack from taking the other thread out of control.
I have a vague feeling about Coldbrew50 saying questionable stuff before, but haven’t the time or energy today to research, so sounds like a to scudsucker for bringing it here if the other poster doesn’t have a pit thread and has a beef (IMHO justified, I too haven’t seen any signs of XKCD being party to either of those two behaviors) with a specific post!
But you have to admit, slamming xkcd and smearing Randall, beloved by almost anyone here at the Dope, is textbook trolling. Just like others, I’ve had a vague troll vibe from ColdBrew for some time, but this clenches it.
ETA: to make my point clearer, this was as much of a trolling post as the “all atheists are psychopaths” from one of our latest trocks.
I’m not sure that Coldbrew is a troll, if anyone is certain, the parent thread is always waiting, but just that several of their posts in the past had rubbed me wrong. So I won’t jump to conclusions yet, and we have the Pit to do just such research.
It could be a vaguely disagreeable poster (to me at least) who did the above Scott Adams / Randall inversion (I’m being defensive because I did a much less weighted name flip in a thread recently!), or it could be a cheap, trollish potshot.
I missed the “all atheists are psychopaths” thread, alas.
But yes, in this case, I wanted to go into full-on battle-mode in a thread totally unrelated to the on-topic posts; so after a few minutes of considering I reported my own post.
I like to think that the rational Dopers would do the same, and I am ashamed to have fallen for the bait.
Pardon my snip, but I’m CERTAINLY not going to throw stones. Probably just about everyone in this and the parent thread have done so either in heat of the moment or despite knowing better. Sometimes a specific poster, or a specific potshot gets to us despite our normal ability to just say no.
I’ve seen a fair number of signs of XKCD being very much the reverse.
If they’ll try hard enough to keep it in their pants, they don’t fail often, and when they fail they’re not causing massive damage, I’ll give them a pass while they’re behaving. As well as remind them firmly to zip up when they’re not.
After all, I want to encourage the idea that if one has some types of impulses but doesn’t act on them, this is better than acting on them.
Agreed in general. Which is what this thread is for, to remind folks who forget or even “forget” occasionally to zip up.
The challenge is how much discount to apply to the rest of what they say, and also keeping an informal sort of score so we can see when the cumulative quantity, or frequency, of unzippings gets beyond the loose community standard.
Moving along from policy to specific cases …
Clearly Imuseless just blew past every warning sign and the assembled police at 150mph and crashed quite spectacularly.
IMO ColdBrew50 is racking up points and might, just might, be gaining speed. But hard for me to make a firm judgment since I haven’t been doing a post-by-post follow, nor am I motivated to start.
Honestly, even the username was a yellowflag, as early as February 13 I had the first discussion of that user being a troll or not. That was a troll and when they realized they were almost gone, they dropped all pretense.
The charitable interpretation is that ColdBrew50 has indeed confused the two. I used to really enjoy Dilbert and it’s a shame that Scott Adams has lost his mind.
I haven’t seen enough of this poster’s work to know if the charitable interpretation is appropriate. If he meant what he said about Randall Munroe and XKCD, that should have been flagged. We’re all entitled to our opinions, of course, but an “opinion” that is this outrageous, that is directed against a target that is very popular on this board, and that cannot be substantiated with a credible cite, is just blatant trolling.
It’s been 12 hours since the XKCD outburst. If he wanted to triangulate or profess confusion (sincerely or otherwise) between Munroe and Adams, it’s about time.
Long before Scot Adams went to Ezra Pound-town with his bigotry, journalists Norman Solomon called out his BS with “The Trouble with Dilbert,” in that Adams pits the rational-thinking techs against the middle management weenies, while ignoring the CEO’s and shareholders who impose the actual system.
There’s no evidence of XKCD’s misogyny. And that’s highly to Randall’s credit, since it was very much a part of the tech-bro culture he came up in. However, there are valid criticisms of XKCD online. None of which stoop to asinine names
Sorry, she was supposed to be processed earlier in the week and I think it slipped. So with yet another virtually identical OP it was time to end it. I expect an announcement will follow later in the week. This one was not mine.
Also had another weird troll pop up a few minutes ago with a very trollish OP. But I think I saw it before anyone else.
I don’t entirely agree with that. While I certainly won’t defend Scott Adams who has gone headfirst into looneyville, he’s depicted CEOs as idiots as well. Which, in the Dilbert world, is why the Pointy-Haired Boss is successful: his idiocy is consistent with the idiocy of upper management. In that world, they’re all guilty of mindless short-term profiteering and screwing the customer.
I’d state it more strongly than “no evidence”. XKCD is populated by female characters who are often portrayed as professionals and are usually the ones making astute observations and rebuttals. XKCD is pretty much the direct opposite of misogyny, and ColdBrew50 is an idiot and almost certainly a troll for making that comment.
to scudsucker for bringing it here if the other poster doesn’t have a pit thread and has a beef (IMHO justified, I too haven’t seen any signs of XKCD being party to either of those two behaviors) with a specific post!