Communication on this forum

[Charles Kozierok]

Having to ask permission to join, and the announcement that there was already a list of undesirables was an enormous mistake.

No, the mistake was having a separate place where the undesirables were not welcome, as opposed to simply banning them from the forum.

It's easy to sit on the sidelines and jeer those trying to make things better, as evidenced by yourself and a few others who have been griping about the DC incessantly ever since the start -- if not before that.

Any effort to do anything about the low quality of discussion and the constant irrationality and abusive behavior is derided as "hubris". What you call "hubris" I call "trying to make a place where people don't have to deal with abusive people incapable or uninterested in reasoning".

But again, apparently most of this forum actually likes mindless propagandizing, threads with people who can't even respond to an argument logically, and lots of flaming and nonsense. So fine, you've got your "non-hubris" forum. Here it is. Wallow in it.

 

[shira]

Do a forum search for conservatard.

It is the favorite word of the whiniest members who post in P&N.

i.e., " I do not like your facts or logical argument... you are a conservatard. And I am going to tell my dad on you."

Wrong. Conservatards don't do actual facts and don't do actual logic. Truthyism is the conservatard way.

 

[shira]

You're displaying a classic example of confirmation bias, i.e. noticing only the things which fit your preconceptions and failing to notice inconvenient information.

I did indeed run a search under "conservatard" and I even ran "conservitard" as an alternative spelling. Total of 9 pages of hits.

Now try running "libtard" like I did. 11 pages of total hits.

This confirmation bias is the same reason conservatives think the media is liberal biased. They only notice those elements which support what they already believe about the media, and they ignore or fail to notice anything inconsistent with the hypothesis of a liberal biased media. Just like you seem to only be aware of "conservatard" but apparently are unaware of the contra insult which is actually a little more prevalent.

You're expecting rational behavior from a conservatard?

 

[woolfe9998]

But again, apparently most of this forum actually likes mindless propagandizing, threads with people who can't even respond to an argument logically, and lots of flaming and nonsense. So fine, you've got your "non-hubris" forum. Here it is. Wallow in it.

Sadly, this is true. It seems that the actual majority of P&N regulars would have little to say if not for canned talking points, snarky one liners, and straw men. My guess is that if a serious attempt was made to moderate the forum, discussion would actually dry up to near DC levels.

 

[woolfe9998]

You're expecting rational behavior from a conservatard?

That's a rhetorical question, but I'll answer it anyway. No, I do not. However, I don't find terms like "conservatard" and "libtard" to be particularly useful. I don't mind insults particular to the individual in question, if the individual deserves them. But those kinds of terms imply generalities which are not all that constructive.

 

[xBiffx]

Recent posts have reminded me of yet another phrase left off the OP's list.

Circlejerk

 

[Retro Rob]

Sadly, this is true. It seems that the actual majority of P&N regulars would have little to say if not for canned talking points, snarky one liners, and straw men. My guess is that if a serious attempt was made to moderate the forum, discussion would actually dry up to near DC levels.

I like the DC, the idea of it was good.

IMO, there isn't enough opposing viewpoints since I see the DC as extremely left-leaning, and that dominates the posting.

I would not go as far as DSF did, but conservative viewpoints seem to be, not rejected, but unwelcomed.

 

[Greenman]

No, the mistake was having a separate place where the undesirables were not welcome, as opposed to simply banning them from the forum.

It's easy to sit on the sidelines and jeer those trying to make things better, as evidenced by yourself and a few others who have been griping about the DC incessantly ever since the start -- if not before that.

Any effort to do anything about the low quality of discussion and the constant irrationality and abusive behavior is derided as "hubris". What you call "hubris" I call "trying to make a place where people don't have to deal with abusive people incapable or uninterested in reasoning".

But again, apparently most of this forum actually likes mindless propagandizing, threads with people who can't even respond to an argument logically, and lots of flaming and nonsense. So fine, you've got your "non-hubris" forum. Here it is. Wallow in it.

The issue between us is that you think the problem with the DC is the users, I think it's the structure. You think conservatives are afraid or not bright enough to post there, I think they see a basically hostile environment where dissenting opinions aren't well received. The difference is that in your point of view the failure is the users, in mine it's the management.

 

[xBiffx]

I like the DC, the idea of it was good.

IMO, there isn't enough opposing viewpoints since I see the DC as extremely left-leaning, and that dominates the posting.

I would not go as far as DSF did, but conservative viewpoints seem to be, not rejected, but unwelcomed.

Sounds like P&N with an air freshener.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

The issue between us is that you think the problem with the DC is the users, I think it's the structure. You think conservatives are afraid or not bright enough to post there, I think they see a basically hostile environment where dissenting opinions aren't well received. The difference is that in your point of view the failure is the users, in mine it's the management.

I think DC is salvagable if they get the right moderation in there. But it will take a special person(s) to undo what's been done.

 

[woolfe9998]

I like the DC, the idea of it was good.

IMO, there isn't enough opposing viewpoints since I see the DC as extremely left-leaning, and that dominates the posting.

I would not go as far as DSF did, but conservative viewpoints seem to be, not rejected, but unwelcomed.

I'm not that familiar with the history of mod actions on that forum. I've seen a few of them. I know that one lefty poster received a temporary ban. I did see one conservative poster get a warning recently where I thought the warning was unnecessary as the post, while not very constructive, wasn't that offensive either. I'm not clear how much of this differential treatment is perception vs. reality. I'd have to see a tally of total mod actions and who they were applied to and for what reasons.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

The issue between us is that you think the problem with the DC is the users, I think it's the structure.

There is no "structure". It's a forum. It works exactly the same way as this one, except the trolling and other obnoxious behavior is not allowed, and people are expected to debate in a logical manner.

It hasn't thrived because most people either can't do that, or don't want to. It's really that simple.

You think conservatives are afraid or not bright enough to post there, I think they see a basically hostile environment where dissenting opinions aren't well received.

It's not dissenting opinions that aren't well-received, it's opinions that are factually incorrect, not well argued, and/or not well supported by evidence. It just so happens that 90+% of what conservatives post in P&N fall into those categories.

I don't know if I'm allowed to name names here, so I won't. But anyone can scan through P&N and see the usual suspects, over and over again. All they are interested in is repeating talking points and flaming the other "team". They aren't all right-wingers, but most of them are. That's why these people don't post in the DC, not the victimology nonsense that you and a handful of others have been repeating over and over for months.

One of the reasons I resigned was to remove this bullshit excuse that my oh-so-unfair moderation was making it hard for the tender sensibilities of the right-wingers around here. There's only one moderator there now, and he's a long-time admin who is a conservative. But the right-wingers still don't post there. And that's because the vast majority of what they have to say is either unconstructive or can't withstand rational scrutiny. There ARE some people on the right who post there, generally those who are actually capable of writing a readable paragraph without drooling on their keyboards. Most stay here because they don't want to discuss, they want to propagandize and scream, and much of the time can't even understand what they are reading.

 

[Retro Rob]

I'm not that familiar with the history of mod actions on that forum. I've seen a few of them. I know that one lefty poster received a temporary ban. I did see one conservative poster get a warning recently where I thought the warning was unnecessary as the post, while not very constructive, wasn't that offensive either. I'm not clear how much of this differential treatment is perception vs. reality. I'd have to see a tally of total mod actions and who they were applied to and for what reasons.

I personally never had a problem with Charles doing most of the modding there, but for some unexplained reason, there are just more left-type posters that frequent it.

Also, I vehemently disagree with Charles' characterization about posters not being able to handle rational scrutiny, which assumes left-leaners are the only rational posters there... and stinks of sheer hubris.

Conservative posters are simply out-numbered in the DC, and some just leave instead of constantly having to fight against overwhemling numbers.

 

[OverVolt]

Yea strawman is a pet peeve of mine. So I heard you read the wiki on logical fallacies have you? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

 

[woolfe9998]

I personally never had a problem with Charles doing most of the modding there, but for some unexplained reason, there are just more left-type posters that frequent it.

Also, I vehemently disagree with Charles' characterization about posters not being able to handle rational scrutiny, which assumes left-leaners are the only rational posters there... and stinks of sheer hubris.

Conservative posters are simply out-numbered in the DC, and some just leave instead of constantly having to fight against overwhemling numbers.

Conservative posters wouldn't be out-numbered there if more would actually come to post. Which is why the root issue seems to be moderator actions since that is purportedly why they aren't coming around. If they stop thinking the mods are biased against them, presumably more will participate and you won't feel so outnumbered any more.

BTW righties outnumber lefties on P&N these days, but that hasn't stopped me from posting to P&N.

 

[shortylickens]

Recent posts have reminded me of yet another phrase left off the OP's list.

Circlejerk

We see that more in L&R........


:sneaky:

 

[cubby1223]

Conservative posters wouldn't be out-numbered there if more would actually come to post. Which is why the root issue seems to be moderator actions since that is purportedly why they aren't coming around. If they stop thinking the mods are biased against them, presumably more will participate and you won't feel so outnumbered any more.

BTW righties outnumber lefties on P&N these days, but that hasn't stopped me from posting to P&N.

Conservatives would post in the Discussion Club if they felt there was a benefit to doing so. We don't owe Charles anything. We don't owe liberals anything.



The beginning interest in the then-called Debate Club was from liberals who believed the structure would strengthen the persuasiveness of their views against conservatives. And it was followed up with many threads turning into a mockery of conservatives for not responding to their overtone-filled posts in their club.

I don't care if a select few liberals get gratification through their club. I know who I am, I know how I treat people around me in real life.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

It's easy to sit on the sidelines and jeer those trying to make things better, as evidenced by yourself and a few others who have been griping about the DC incessantly ever since the start -- if not before that.

You were getting feedback that you dismissed as "jeering" from the very beginning....just as you've dismissed recent feedback from several conservative posters regarding the reasons they felt uncomfortable posting in DC. You're dismissive because you happen to know the "real reasons" for the lack of conservative representation. CK, who is anyone to disagree with you?

 

[Charles Kozierok]

I honestly no longer give a shit. I resigned three months ago and at that time strongly suggested to the admins that they shut it down. They didn't want to do that, so there it sits. You and the others wanted it to fail, and it has. Celebrate.

And of course, never stop pretending that you've been persecuted, even though to my knowledge the only person ever suspended from there was one of the most left-leaning people on the board, and it was only for a week. It's much easier to make up bullshit than to face the simple reality that the vast majority of conservative posters on this board are incapable of logical reasoning and debate.

 

[Retro Rob]

You were getting feedback that you dismissed as "jeering" from the very beginning....just as you've dismissed recent feedback from several conservative posters regarding the reasons they felt uncomfortable posting in DC. You're dismissive because you happen to know the "real reasons" for the lack of conservative representation. CK, who is anyone to disagree with you?

He should take honest feedback more seriously if that place is to be improved....

I don't think anyone was "blaming" him as much as it *could* have been his own doing. Self-examination is needed, at times.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

He should take honest feedback more seriously if that place is to be improved....

I don't think anyone was "blaming" him as much as it *could* have been his own doing. Self-examination is needed, at times.

Did you miss the part where I resigned months ago? How about the part where all the so-called persecution of right-wingers is wholly concocted bullshit?

It's bad enough that I wasted dozens, if not hundreds of hours of my time for nothing. Having to listen to this crap is REALLY pissing me off.

 

[Retro Rob]

Did you miss the part where I resigned months ago? How about the part where all the so-called persecution of right-wingers is wholly concocted bullshit?

I don't know how I am sounding "persecuted" as I have been actively posting there, and was being completely honest about fighting numbers. That gets uninteresting real fast -- no fault of your own, just lack of differing viewpoints.

I was being honest, and quite frankly, I didn't have an issue with you personally.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

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.

 

[OverVolt]

I honestly no longer give a shit. I resigned three months ago and at that time strongly suggested to the admins that they shut it down. They didn't want to do that, so there it sits. You and the others wanted it to fail, and it has. Celebrate.

And of course, never stop pretending that you've been persecuted, even though to my knowledge the only person ever suspended from there was one of the most left-leaning people on the board, and it was only for a week. It's much easier to make up bullshit than to face the simple reality that the vast majority of conservative posters on this board are incapable of logical reasoning and debate.

Yes because being a liberal is the most logical thing to do and disagreeing means you're stupid!

I see this all the time on here.

FWIW I have no idea whatever drama happened to you and you are fine by me. Just dislike the liberal logical high horse.

 

[ivwshane]

Yea strawman is a pet peeve of mine. So I heard you read the wiki on logical fallacies have you? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

Yes because being a liberal is the most logical thing to do and disagreeing means you're stupid!

I see this all the time on here.

FWIW I have no idea whatever drama happened to you and you are fine by me. Just dislike the liberal logical high horse.

Oh the irony!

I love it!