Communication on this forum

[boomerang]

Thanks.

I'll be the first to admit I enjoy trolling the fuck out of tards like SS when they get out of line though.

And how pissed off do you think boomer needed to be to start scouring the internet for dirt on dank69s? :awe:

Today was a good day.

Not pissed in the slightest. I was trying to find something for a lead in to make the point that I felt you were getting a little out of control today using a little humor. You must have increased your post count by what, about 100 to 150 today? :biggrin:

And you took my "chastising" which consisted of the words, "your easygoing sunshiny personality" very gracefully. Or, I may have just been too subtle. No matter. I'm good and I'm guessing you're good.

And we live to fight another day... Hah!

 

[bshole]

Why do I need to "take feedback more seriously" when not only is the feedback total bullshit, I haven't been in a position of responsibility there for months?

I quit in large part so that the whiners wouldn't have me to whine about, and they're still doing it. What does it take, you want to cut off a testicle or something?

Why don't one of you heroes volunteer to be a moderator there and see how wonderful you can make it. I think Incorruptible would do an awesome job, personally.

ETA: Apparently my mere presence on this forum in any form is just too overwhelming for the poor dears, so I'll make it easier on all of you and leave entirely. Maybe I'll come back in three years and you'll still be complaining about how horrible I was back in 2013.

And you never came back? Unbelievable.

 

[Genx87]

necro'd and wrote something

 

[Greenman]

And you never came back? Unbelievable.

He got pretty mad at us for not noticing how great he was.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Three most commonly utilized phrases in this forum:

• Partisan hack....
• Goal posts....
• Strawman....
• Leftie
• Rightie
• Fucking asshole

It's a great place for family fun and wholesome conversation.

You forgot

Shill
Asshat

 

[Newell Steamer]

Strawman is irrelevant, because the person who pukes up that word is just as guilty of it. The same jackass that decries the 'tactic' of "Hey, at least it's not,..." uses it him/herself. So, there is literally no value in bringing up strawman - unless you yourself have never used it - which is rare on P&N. Frankly, just don't bring it up.

On that note, this is the problem of P&N, in regards to communications:
communication is about being conscious of not only the words of the other, but yourself as well. P&N posters RARELY are conscious of what they themselves are saying.

There is a CRAP load of contradictions on these boards - and, they are usually from the right leaning posters.

There is also the problem of black and white points of view. And, again, it's usually the right.

Rarely does the right admit it's wrong. When there is criticism cast on the right, the right then spins or flips the criticism as:
1) the accuser/observer being wrong (discrediting them, downplaying the accusation/observation)
2) the victim in the critical observations (i.e. a poor person, a rape victim) brought this upon themselves

Life is gray. There can never be extremes.

You can have extreme and pure goals in your mind - but, they will only exist in your mind. If you fail to live a life of adaptation, cooperation and understanding you might as well turn in your humanity,... which most righties had done and it is a result of their brain defect; constantly fearing everything and anything - even if there really isn't a legitimate danger.

The right wants to instill the extreme ideals in their mind into all our lives, because then they will have control over the things they fear: which is everything.

That is why the right loves private entities so much. Private entities can decide what and who to let in. Whereas an entity like the government allows mostly anyone in - and the right does not like such an open and 'welcoming' entity.

To bring it back: the right is SO fearful of life, they forget what their own life is about and lose track and consciousness of what they are really saying - which is why they constantly contradict themselves.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Not a CK fan, I cannot lie.

bshole, why did you resurrect this thread?

 

[dank69]

Strawman is irrelevant, because the person who pukes up that word is just as guilty of it. The same jackass that decries the 'tactic' of "Hey, at least it's not,..." uses it him/herself. So, there is literally no value in bringing up strawman - unless you yourself have never used it - which is rare on P&N. Frankly, just don't bring it up.

...

Horseshit. Straw men are one of the biggest problems with this forum. They completely derail the conversation and muck up the debates.

 

[rudeguy]

Horseshit. Straw men are one of the biggest problems with this forum. They completely derail the conversation and muck up the debates.

That is just horse shit. That's like saying Barbara Boxer is a genius. Its just wrong and stupid.

You have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[Newell Steamer]

Horseshit. Straw men are one of the biggest problems with this forum. They completely derail the conversation and muck up the debates.

Have you ever used a straw man argument?

 

[dank69]

Have you ever used a straw man argument?

I actively avoid ever using them. Using one is tantamount to admitting you can't criticize the other party's actual argument.

 

[Newell Steamer]

I actively avoid ever using them. Using one is tantamount to admitting you can't criticize the other party's actual argument.

Then this applies to you:

So, there is literally no value in bringing up strawman - unless you yourself have never used it - which is rare on P&N.

Or, rather, rarely used in your case - if not, then ever indeed (I'm not going to analyze your post history,...).

You have a valid complaint.

:thumbsup:

My issue, which applies to the majority on P&N, is that they themselves use straw man arguments - and still complain about it.

I use straw men, no bones about it, but, I would never point a finger at someone and yell "STRAW MAN!" when they use it. But, I will call them out when I know they have used it and then point out I am (again, the jackasses).

 

[dank69]

Then this applies to you:


Or, rather, rarely used in your case - if not, then ever indeed (I'm not going to analyze your post history,...).

You have a valid complaint.

:thumbsup:

My issue, which applies to the majority on P&N, is that they themselves use straw man arguments - and still complain about it.

I use straw men, no bones about it, but, I would never point a finger at someone and yell "STRAW MAN!" when they use it. But, I will call them out when I know they have used it and then point out I am (again, the jackasses).

Most of the people who claim straw man don't even understand what it is.

If it were up to me, every logical fallacy in P&N would be an infractionable offense.

 

[sm625]

The most common phrase you read on this forum should be "This message is hidden because"...

 

[OverVolt]

Most of the people who claim straw man don't even understand what it is.

If it were up to me, every logical fallacy in P&N would be an infractionable offense.

You and Newell are two peas from the same pod you know. Watching you two eat up each others bullshit is hilarious.

 

[Newell Steamer]

You and Newell are two peas from the same pod you know. Watching you two eat up each others bullshit is hilarious.

And even if we did, we would never reach the fullness of shit you are known for.

 

[realibrad]

I actively avoid ever using them. Using one is tantamount to admitting you can't criticize the other party's actual argument.

You have just committed a formal fallacy.

Appeal to probability – is a statement that takes something for granted because it would probably be the case (or might be the case)

 

[dank69]

You have just committed a formal fallacy.

Appeal to probability – is a statement that takes something for granted because it would probably be the case (or might be the case)

tantamount->virtually->not always

Nothing taken for granted.

P.S. - I avoid absolutes as much as possible.

 

[realibrad]

tantamount->virtually->not always

Nothing taken for granted.

P.S. - I avoid absolutes as much as possible.

You took something for granted because it would probably be the case.

So when you said...

I actively avoid ever using them. Using one is tantamount to admitting you can't criticize the other party's actual argument.

You were implying that its the same as not being able to criticize the other party's argument. A person could use a straw man, and criticize the argument as they are not mutually exclusive.

To, to say its tantamount is to say its the same, when in fact it is not. I would suspect that you likely know this, because most people that don't like to speak in absolutes know that doing so will put them in the very situation you are in. We are human, so having hard rules like giving an infraction for fallacies would likely be excessive.

 

[dank69]

You took something for granted because it would probably be the case.

So when you said...

You were implying that its the same as not being able to criticize the other party's argument.

No. When I used the term tantamount I meant it like this:

tan·ta·mount
ˈtan(t)əˌmount/
adjective
adjective: tantamount
equivalent in seriousness to; virtually the same as.
"the resignations were tantamount to an admission of guilt"

Resignations are not the same as an admission of guilt but they definitely give that impression. See the word virtually?

vir·tu·al·ly
ˈvərCH(əw)əlē/
adverb
1.
nearly; almost.
"virtually all those arrested were accused"
synonyms: effectively, in effect, all but, more or less, practically, almost, nearly, close to, verging on, just about, as good as, essentially, to all intents and purposes, roughly, approximately; More
2.
by means of virtual reality techniques.

Nearly. Almost. I was not implying that they are the same, I was implying that they are almost the same.

A person could use a straw man, and criticize the argument as they are not mutually exclusive.

I am aware of this.

To, to say its tantamount is to say its the same, when in fact it is not. I would suspect that you likely know this, because most people that don't like to speak in absolutes know that doing so will put them in the very situation you are in.

See above.

We are human, so having hard rules like giving an infraction for fallacies would likely be excessive.

It would result in most of the population of P&N being on vacation more than they are not.

 

[bshole]

It would result in most of the population of P&N being on vacation more than they are not.

And the mods having no lifes whatsoever. I hope their pay would go up for such brutal duty.

 

[feralkid]

Still prefer any of those to:


Literally
Ironic
Random
Basically

 

[dank69]

And the mods having no lifes whatsoever. I hope their pay would go up for such brutal duty.

Their pay would likely triple.

 

[Exophase]

Strawman is irrelevant, because the person who pukes up that word is just as guilty of it. The same jackass that decries the 'tactic' of "Hey, at least it's not,..." uses it him/herself. So, there is literally no value in bringing up strawman - unless you yourself have never used it - which is rare on P&N. Frankly, just don't bring it up.

I don't really get this reasoning, where you shouldn't say someone's using a poor/unfair argument if you've at any point made a bad argument yourself. The strawman term may be loaded and often used to insult people but it's really supposed to be about attacking the argument, not the person...

Sometimes people actually don't even realize that they're using a strawman, because they sincerely misunderstand the other person's position. Could be because of bad assumptions, but could also be a mistake in reading, or even that the other person said something misleading or awkward. Communication can be fuzzy.

You maybe don't have to use the actual strawman term, but it's not always a bad thing to tell someone they don't understand or are misrepresenting your position. I know I've been guilty of this before and didn't know it until I was told, then I apologized and moved on instead of continuing an argument that's been deemed pointless.

 

[sandorski]

If someone moves the Goalpost, uses a Strawman, or uses some other Logical Fallacy, it's perfectly legit to call them out on it. If that person uses Logical Fallacies on purpose and is not using it as Parody or Ironically, they are undermining their position.