So glad you brought up the "enabling" accussation again. Do you guys have a wheel of accusations you spin for when you want to troll with accusations related to racism?

Enabling is one of those fancy Psychological terms, isn't it? That means it comes with a framework and mechanism that is describable in a very non-contentious, non-demeaning manner that even a meek, mild-mannered person could understand.

Dids has certainly enabled racists ITF. He has made a thread designed to encourage them to post. Direct enabling.

Foldn, on the other-hand, has greatly enabled understanding and dialogue about racism. He has enabled many words of discussion that have succeeded in a purpose of exchanging information to reach a better understanding.

Foldn has enabled the end of racism, as we could never solve the problems of racism without understanding them. Without even-keeled, open-minded, and curious folks like foldn it would be greatly difficult to share information leading to better understanding in a discussion community.

You, on the other, other-hand, enabled racial acrimony; enabling confusion and conflict surrounding the problems of racism. You make racism harder to understand and harder to communicate about. You waste time gossiping and making accusations. To be blunt, stopping and thinking is a good option you can choose to change this.

I'm assuming you think that's what I said, but I didn't. I was pointing out that identifying racism in law enforcement is a problem and then just assuming the answer is to find non-racist cops could be insufficient. It might be that working in law enforcement has a way of actually creating racism. For example, cops who work in crime-ridden areas where most of the violent crime is between blacks may start forming biases they didn't previously have. That so far studies show black officers (who are probably less likely to be racist) tend to act like their white counterparts might support this idea.

I think another way to test it would be to look at the individual officers. Find out if for a particular stat like search rate, which is skewed heavily toward blacks and indicates bias, are all the cops generally searching blacks at that higher rate, or is it just some (more racist) cops who shoot the curve while the non-racist cops search at an even rate? If it's just some cops, we might infer racist cops entering the police force are the main problem, and simply weeding them out will improve the situation. If it turns out most of the force tend to search at the same rate, then we might be able to infer either most people who choose to enter the police force are significantly racist, or they are becoming more racist due to their experiences on the job.

Only a machine could resist the allure of pure, unadultered racism!

With posts this stupid, you seem like the ugly groupie for a poorly-received local band.

Well, considering I just took the time to explain what I mean in detail, and you just shrugged it off instead of engaging in the conversation, there's no reason I should value your or any similar troll's opinion on the matter.

It is easier if you keep in mind that Anais is almost, but not quite, as clever as your average head of broccoli.

your pseudo-intellectualism is so LOL

So you spun the wheel of accusation and it landed on psuedo-intellectualism. That is a broad category of information, but it also quite explainable. Please explain why you make that accusation and be specific.

stop trolling, it's pathetic

like, i dont think anybody itt even gives a **** about brucez, we're just here to lol at his horde of minions

you're spending a lot of time crafting posts with a lot of big words, empty assertions, and pretentious writing style, more or less for nothing.

this whole thread was created because chez just COULDN'T LET IT GO, this isn't something that liberal activists have created for the purpose of improving race relations in USA#1

Wrong again! Because I didn't read further than the first sentence or so because lol foldn

This is practically effortless. I have no good cause to stop disrupting the disruptive use of fallacious accusations related to racism. Disrupting false or mistaken accusations of racism disrupts racists as well as stupid acting fools.

So the latest accusation is 'couldn't let it go' and the target is chez. Plenty of time to think about it.

He has his moments. For example, I think the ugly groupy line could be a nice burn under the right circumstances, but yeah, he's pretty much a less articulate and slightly less nutty Fly toady.

Spank might be the best troll ever.

Spanky has been hard in the paint impersonating a ******ed person for like a year. That's some DBJ-grade dedication to trolling.

He actually does pretty well when he uses humor. Unfortunately, this has been becoming more and more rare.

Development Bank of Japan?

So you spun the wheel of accussation and got troll. Well, technically trolling trolls is trolling, so I'll give you partial credit. Rejoice, you got one almost half-correct.

Oh, look an extra-special combo. This poster gets to spin the wheel of accussation for each troll-gimmick they use. So you spun 'faking a developmental disability' accussation, as well as the boring old 'troll' accussation, and 'a guilt by association with a poster outed as deceptive' accussation. That's three false accusations in one! Pretty lame, I'm fairly sure you degradingly troll with more gimmicks than that.

This seems logical to me. For all of the posters who like to hurl the racist label, what problem do you see with this method to potentially improving the situation?

rjoe- "Rarely". Oh, that's too harsh. You mean "always". This is the racial profiling two-step, first racist morons deny that racial profiling exists, that there's any disparity in the criminal justice system.

Then, after that gets conclusively rebutted, we always switch to "oh but that's not because cops are racist, it's because black people are just so criminal".

Every time.

Now, to a SMP poster, apparently that **** is seen as a bold contrarian take, literally breaking new ground in criminology or whatever.

But for those of us who are exposed to the outside world on a schedule of our own making, uh, that's the bog standard racist argument for oppressing a widely reviled minority. Talk radio, Fox news, chain emails, Thanksgiving with a drunk uncle....

The majority is not tremendously creative when it comes to rationalizing mistreating the minority, because hell, it ain't like it's Brian's problem(or spank's, or masque's, or FoldN's). They just wants to chat on these here interwebs without seeing any swear words.

Since this thread will never die, maybe we can go back and clear up some of the mystery for me. It is my understanding that much of the BruceZ affair arose because some readers were not aware that many of his posts were Devil's Advocate positions, even parodies. Weirdly, however, I don't remember anybody actually pointing out any specific posts as insincere.

I have to confess, I am one of those people that is just not smart enough to understand the SMP discourse, it's just way over my head. Maybe the best way to start the healing process would be to have one of you guys point out a couple of the insincere posts, and explain how dumb people like me can figure out that those aren't his real-deal opinions.

ETA: I'll give you a head start. I'm assuming that nobody really thinks that slaves won the lottery or that black people have a disease that makes them walk in the street. What's the secret non-racist meaning of those posts? Why make that up?

You might find the following to be helpful: http://wvde.state.wv.us/strategybank/comprehension.html