Go call it a proxy war and see what happens. And only if you think it is, do it was sincerity, and see what happens. I didn't claim a post of mine was deleted. I'm claiming that the loudest people here, when you show them they are wrong, they create a circular spam mess, and if they have the favor the mods, the mods will warn and ban the person that pointing out the truth.

You guys just couldn’t handle a purple thread.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trolly McTrollson

You guys just couldn’t handle a purple thread.

The content wouldn’t change because everyone is expressing their own opinions of what is truth and what isn’t right now and they would be then as well. You can call it whatever you want but that won’t change the fact that there isn’t any objective classification of “purple balanced thinking”. If all you mean is people should strive to find common ground instead of being combative, I don’t see why this should always be a priority, who determines when this condition has been met, and you don’t need this color coding junk to say that.

I think you are wrong. Of course experiment would tell us who is right. Or allow us to see. But when the focus is now on who isn't balanced versus who is, then then the petty fighting about the dualistic content will be viewed from a higher order. So it wouldn't fix things on the level you are thinking. But the purple thread would have a different nature, and I'm not convinced that wouldn't have an effect on the content.

I'm quite sure it would.

First, we need to define what you mean by PURPLE. But more importantly, then we need to define what you mean by EXPERIMENTAL. How can we even begin to have a conversation with defining the terms?

you're a raving anti semite, so take a deep breath and be happy for the hands off mods

Homeslice is not big on definitions, yo.

Homeslice tells you how to build a watch when you ask him for the time.

There, that's better.

jbouton, the mod that posts frequently in the Russian v Ukraine thread is not a moderator in this forum. He is simply another poster.

jbouton, the title of that Invasion thread is fine and does not need to be changed.

jbouton, there will be no Purple thread... for all the reasons the current P&S mod crew has stated. You already create too much animosity; you already have a thread (SM) that SHOULD be a jbouton containment thread; your fixation on definitions is extraordinary.

Everyone, stop feeding the trolls in our forum. It is almost always unproductive and bogs down practically every thread.

As far as I know, no mod of this forum has taken any action against a poster in that thread for calling the conflict a proxy war.

You keep making fun of me for this, but I use common definitions that are backed by wiki and the dictionary. Almost always. And I'm very clear when I don't, and I certainly mean to be. So I don't know why you keep implying I play word games.

My complaint you are in the middle of is that BGP won't allow the phrase 'proxy-war', to refer to the ukrain/russia conflict. Im not using a made up definition. I mean this:

Bpg only admits that its by a 'very loose definition':

Its a proxy war, its not even debatable by the above definition. What does it means 'a very loose definition'?

Ur making fun of my use of words, but I'm not doing the thing you are implying. Look.

Nor did anyone claim as such.

Is that a rule that will outweigh the community if the community decides it should be otherwise? And is it just purple, or also no other colors?

Its not me that is the cause of the conflict
You are dehumanizing me.

Where would you put the probability of this event occurring?

Seems like a decent chance that a bunch of people want to keep egging him on for their own amusement.

You said:

That post certainly implied that some action had been taken by a moderator of the Politics forum to prevent posters from describing the conflict as a proxy war.

I’m more amused when they give him vacations to make him stfu.

jbouton,

Three different moderators have told you that your "purple thread" idea isn't going to happen. There is no point in debating what would happen if there were widespread support for your idea because no such support exists.

Move on, or in the alternative, find a politics forum that is more in line with your desires and expectations.

Holy **** man, you're a truly, truly terrible communicator. I don't know how this hasn't become clear to you by now, because over and over again you get into disputes over definitions, what you mean when you say a certain word, trying to get others to agree on your definitions - you constantly have people unable to understand what you're saying. Far more time in discussions with you is spent on how the issues should be discussed, than on the actual issues themselves. And this has happened with all your past accounts, like when you've gone down Nash rabbit holes where very few people, if any, understand what you're saying.

This is what you said:

Quite clearly, that statement, and subsequent conversation about it, is causing confusion. So why don't you just explain it? Precisely who is not letting posters make this claim, and how are they doing so? Just spell it out.

No, you don't. Over and over again you get into debates over definitions you are using, and it happens on a more frequent basis with you than anyone else. It's time to take some responsibility for this. It's easy to solve - when there's confusion, explain yourself.

All three mods have given you an answer, and so has the community. Let it go.

I dunno, jbouton seems pretty easy to understand. not sure why all you high iq posters have such trouble getting his points.

also, if jbou cant start a purple thread, could someone else?

Hold on. I'm saying that I'm copy pasting the wiki and pointing to that, rather than pointing to a custom definition. You might be referring to the idea that I don't read wiki will, but thats not a counter to the point I made about how I use words.

To me that makes sense when its bunch of people with red/blue dualitistic arguing. Mindless back and forth predictable posting between lazy people.
There is NOTHING hard about this:



I did spell it out. If a someone favored by the mods gets shown up with truth, all they have to do invoke circularity into the dialogue until a mod comes in and warns/bans the unfavored person.

If you don't believe me, then go in the russia/ukraine thread and try to sincerely claim that the conflict is this:

There are few posters here that understand me perfectly enough, thats for sure.

So no threads where we try to achieve balance in dialogue rather than just arguing. Understood.

I told you people understand me. Do you want to claim its just one side of the political view? Red or blue? I'll bet its not a red blue thing. I'll bet there are people on both sides of the political spectrum that can see intelligence in the suggestion.