Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
Personal Attacks in Political Forums by Poobahs Mr Wookie, 5ive, goofybalef AoFrantic etc Personal Attacks in Political Forums by Poobahs Mr Wookie, 5ive, goofybalef AoFrantic etc

06-22-2017 , 07:47 PM
And now Zorkman, in a sign of wanting to engage in meaningful conversation, has changed his avatar to Steve Bannon.
06-22-2017 , 08:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bahbahmickey
Being surprised that there aren't a lot of smart conservative posters here to have reasonable discussions with is like being surprised there aren't a lot of liberals posters doing the same at sites like breitbert or infowars. When you have years and years of a forum culture that is hateful towards a political party don't be surprised when that party stops showing up or starts trolling the hatred - especially when some of the mods are the worst of the offenders.
bahbah mickey , I don't think this applies to just this site but to our country. A lot of people had no impact on policy and had goals or thoughts that had 0 chance of being implemented thus Trump was born. This pretty much sums up what i hear most trumpers in kansas and missouri say.
06-22-2017 , 08:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by goofyballer
- those are news sites, 2+2 is a poker site
- it wasn't even that long ago that the Politics forum was overrun with libertarians and anarchists
Gee, I wonder how those stoopid libtards become the majority voice in the forum. Must have been through insincere polemics and by whining in ATF. Not by, you know, actually engaging the libertarians in honest discussion and having the better arguments or whatever. That would never work.
06-22-2017 , 08:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by zikzak
Gee, I wonder how those stoopid libtards become the majority voice in the forum. Must have been through insincere polemics and by whining in ATF. Not by, you know, actually engaging the libertarians in honest discussion and having the better arguments or whatever. That would never work.
When I first started reading twoplustwo the politics forum had a lot of bizzarre anarcho capitalists idealists leading the discussions. In 2004 and 2005 pvn vs dvaut was the heavyweight political fight in the forum. pvn basically stopped giving a **** and also changed positions(?) and dvaut is still dvaut.

There were many causes but one thing I think is as the poker boom went on and the site was growing until 2009ish more casual on politics but smart people showed up.
06-22-2017 , 08:40 PM
I know the poker world was much more prosperous and you could be guaranteed money just by showing up with a copy of the super system but have some respect for poker boomers even if you hate their views of the political world.
06-23-2017 , 03:49 AM
Given the subjectivity of the rules, in particular, the trolling, and derailing, it makes sense giving the OP some limited scope in enforcing these rules by collaborating with the mods and describing what is/isn't derailing and trolling for the OP (who has the most interest in keeping the topic alive and well). This can be accomplished utilizing a sticky, and simply stating that an OP can establish the ground rules in the original post.

To be blunt, I'm not going to start a thread on anarcho-capitalism when every other post is going to be the kerolol, shame-troll tag-team where it's stuff I've never even heard of "roof roads" and "sky roads", and how the endgame for ACism is rape-town, and other nonsense. And, I can either blunt the usual nonsense attacks with pages in the OP, debunking these arguments before hand, but it still will not stop the repetitive nature of these arguments, which creates a mockitocracy over a meritocracy, a race to the bottom. Either that or I can just use the same tactics, and get-in on this race to the bottom business.
06-23-2017 , 04:34 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zorkman
Why don't you believe him?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrWookie
Well, I mean, let's grant him that he ate a 24 hr ban with which he did not get an infraction, and let's also grant him that he had also made a statism = religion post in the time period around that ban. It is still entirely possible, even likely, that the actual reason for the ban was another post made around the same time, or that his statism =religion post had more content or more context that was relevant to the ban decision that he isn't revealing, and he would not be the first poster being deliberately coy about the actual reason behind his ban.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noodle Wazlib
I think you tied your shoelaces wrong that day, which led to a cascading series of events, butterfly effect-style, that ended with you accidentally being banned when a mod was trying to ban someone else.

We have exactly the same amount of evidence for our competing theories.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trolly McTrollson
I got banned once, it caused me considerable butthurt.
The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. I did receive a 24-hour ban, and on top of that, there's no trace of the actual comment, and no infraction report. I searched every comment I made in November. There's no trace of a comment that says statism is a religion. Either I am entirely mistaken, or some rogue mod put on his super jimmies around election day gave me a 24-hour ban, and covered his/her tracks. Regardless, I sincerely apologize for automatically blaming Wookie for this incident that did happen. I cannot seem to prove that I was even banned at all.

Last edited by leavesofliberty; 06-23-2017 at 04:46 AM.
06-23-2017 , 04:35 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by zikzak
Gee, I wonder how those stoopid libtards become the majority voice in the forum. Must have been through insincere polemics and by whining in ATF. Not by, you know, actually engaging the libertarians in honest discussion and having the better arguments or whatever. That would never work.
Uh huh. It's more like we followed the Ron Paul movement, which later lost steam. There was a huge uptick in libertarianism and anarcho-capitalism around the same time period across the US. But, if you think I'm going to post with a bunch of toxic personalities who want to take me down to their level, you're sadly mistaken. I'd sooner watch Disney's "Cool Runnings", which you know, has some libertarian themes and a neat tune titled "Rise Above It".

Last edited by leavesofliberty; 06-23-2017 at 04:48 AM.
06-23-2017 , 06:35 AM
Oh, and I'm sure I dreamt the whole thing fellas.

/sarcasm
06-23-2017 , 07:47 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrWookie
Well, feel free to PM awval999, the OP of the Trump presidency thread, and who's overtly pretty OK with Trump's proposed oppression as long as he gets a tax cut, about how he must have been banned.
You will always keep some conservatives around to legitimise your biased forum. They are just pawns in your game.
06-23-2017 , 07:50 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrWookie
I mean, it's probably true. I travel a lot and will see some reports that I mean to act on later and then forget about.
Didn't forget mine even when you were on your honeymoon, funny that...
06-23-2017 , 08:31 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bundy5
You will always keep some conservatives around to legitimise your biased forum. They are just pawns in your game.
Occam's razor suggests you're a paranoid delusional
06-23-2017 , 09:26 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by leavesofliberty
Given the subjectivity of the rules, in particular, the trolling, and derailing, it makes sense giving the OP some limited scope in enforcing these rules by collaborating with the mods and describing what is/isn't derailing and trolling for the OP (who has the most interest in keeping the topic alive and well). This can be accomplished utilizing a sticky, and simply stating that an OP can establish the ground rules in the original post.

To be blunt, I'm not going to start a thread on anarcho-capitalism when every other post is going to be the kerolol, shame-troll tag-team where it's stuff I've never even heard of "roof roads" and "sky roads", and how the endgame for ACism is rape-town, and other nonsense. And, I can either blunt the usual nonsense attacks with pages in the OP, debunking these arguments before hand, but it still will not stop the repetitive nature of these arguments, which creates a mockitocracy over a meritocracy, a race to the bottom. Either that or I can just use the same tactics, and get-in on this race to the bottom business.
First, no one cares about ACist crap so we're starting fairly low. Second, all you have to is answer the questions about ACland. Which you never did, you just hem and haw about how unfair the question is.
06-23-2017 , 09:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by leavesofliberty
... I can either blunt the usual nonsense attacks with pages in the OP, debunking these arguments before hand...
No. No you can't. That's the problem.

Another thing... you keep on claiming I'm making 'arguments' regarding ACism. Nothing could be farther than the truth. I'm not making 'arguments' that ACland would be 'good' or 'bad' or whatev. I'm simply trying to explain what ACism actually is.

It's like I'm trying to explain baseball. I start out saying that there's nine fielders, and normally nine innings, etc. You are freaking out that I'm "trolling" (LMFAO no, you're the one trolling), that I'm "strawmanning" (who could I possibly be strawmanning?), and that I'm 'arguing' something regarding the 'goodness' of baseball (wrong, I'm just explaining the game, not saying it's 'good' or 'bad').

The problem you have is I know like 10000% more about ACism than you ever will. Let me repeat that: I know like 10000% more about ACism than you ever will. AINEC. You are attempting to 'argue' from a place of extreme ignorance. I'm simply trying to explain things from a place of general knowledge. This is what leads to your frustration... not this alleged 'trolling' you like to dissemble about.
06-23-2017 , 09:53 AM
Anarchists demanding stricter rules to encore order ITT.
06-23-2017 , 09:54 AM
Cool runnings, mon!


06-23-2017 , 10:03 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by leavesofliberty
Given the subjectivity of the rules, in particular, the trolling, and derailing, it makes sense giving the OP some limited scope in enforcing these rules by collaborating with the mods and describing what is/isn't derailing and trolling for the OP (who has the most interest in keeping the topic alive and well). This can be accomplished utilizing a sticky, and simply stating that an OP can establish the ground rules in the original post.

To be blunt, I'm not going to start a thread on anarcho-capitalism when every other post is going to be the kerolol, shame-troll tag-team where it's stuff I've never even heard of "roof roads" and "sky roads", and how the endgame for ACism is rape-town, and other nonsense. And, I can either blunt the usual nonsense attacks with pages in the OP, debunking these arguments before hand, but it still will not stop the repetitive nature of these arguments, which creates a mockitocracy over a meritocracy, a race to the bottom. Either that or I can just use the same tactics, and get-in on this race to the bottom business.
There used to be user modded threads, JJ introduced them. I like the concept, with a few tweaks, a lot but the lack of software support for it is a problem and they didn't get much use for that or other reasons. No promises but it's not imposible that they could return in some form.
06-23-2017 , 10:27 AM
LOL
06-23-2017 , 11:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by leavesofliberty
Uh huh. It's more like we followed the Ron Paul movement, which later lost steam. There was a huge uptick in libertarianism and anarcho-capitalism around the same time period across the US. But, if you think I'm going to post with a bunch of toxic personalities who want to take me down to their level, you're sadly mistaken. I'd sooner watch Disney's "Cool Runnings", which you know, has some libertarian themes and a neat tune titled "Rise Above It".
Speaking of toxic.... Which person made up a story about being banned because they have a persecution complex?
06-23-2017 , 01:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimmayB
People who support Trump should be looked down on. This is not a political opinion but an objective fact, which coincidentally, Trumpers have a really hard time understanding.

This sort of sanctimony precludes any coherent or productive conversation.
06-23-2017 , 01:11 PM
With respect to the accusations and counteraccusations of racism, I heartily suggest that everyone involved go and read a recent slatestarcodex post about racism and the ways in which we think about it. It is food for thought.
06-23-2017 , 01:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Howard Treesong
This sort of sanctimony precludes any coherent or productive conversation.
With that person maybe, but the fun thing is that lots of people post here, so if you think one is a disingenuous troll, you can simply ignore them.
06-24-2017 , 01:35 AM
Grunching...

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrWookie
Zorkman, on not assuming the other side is evil:
So Dr. Zorka is more extreme and ridiculous than PyramidScheme. That's incredible.
06-24-2017 , 01:37 AM
Ok wait.

This dude literally just did the 'confirm/deny' meme with sincerity and earnestness in a serious discussion.

I don't even.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul D
You don't mean well when you start with idiotic statements like Obama did so much damage to America. Your worldview is narrow and selfish.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zorkman
It is easier to read an opinion with which you disagree and immediately assume bad motive on the part of the holder of that opinion. The greater challenge is to avoid personal attacks and engage the argument with all the facts and resources at your disposal to show how my opinion is wrong, that America was made better by Obama's policies with which you agree, and here is example 1, example 2, and example 3 (specifically).
06-24-2017 , 01:37 AM
NegroPrez ruined country, confirm/deny.

      
m