Lol this post is dripping with sincerity. Feel free to explain why my analogy has you so SHOCKED and DISMAYED.
But just in case you honestly don’t understand the point, here goes:
It’s been a pretty common trope for right-wingers to defend any instance of obvious racism right up to using the N-word or being a member of the KKK. But then if the person in question actually gets caught using the N-word, the defenders sheepishly flip over to "Ok, yeah you got him - that’s racist.” This whole concept has been joked about here 100s of times and argued about on old 22 more than that.
That is the point - which I still struggle to see how anyone on this forum wouldn’t get - that some of you would defend obvious trolling (which can be as difficult to define and nail down as racism) right up to the point of the user flat out bragging about trolling, then be like “yeah ok you got him”. Which I actually expected here. But surreally, some of you have found a way to claim that trolling then bragging about it is not evidence of trolling. o_O
If you still don’t understand the point I can’t help you.
I can’t wait until the part of this exercise when the people who are constantly moderated for going over the line with abuse and personal attacks use a new sub forum for abuse and personal attacks against people who weren’t in the PM group that “can’t” be moderated how they are here.
I still don’t do anything here without a community mandate because everyone shits all over everyone for everything so I don’t do anything because I don’t like being shit on.
Completely separate from forum drama and anything going on now, I decided at the start of June that I no longer enjoyed posting here and stopped altogether indefinitely on June 1. But since I’m an admin, I get emailed when when I get PM’d or mentioned so eventually came back to deal with Bryce, and then everyone started requesting 14-day bans to prepare to anonymize, and so I decided to see if I could do anything to not have the place completely fall apart because I figured I’d still want to post here once NFL season starts. Then the PM shitstorm hit, and my goal is still to not have this place fall apart.
But back to your question about forums, who knows what I would have done back in the halcyon days when I could go into a store to buy a pair of shoes instead of holding mine together with ducktape, and post on an internet forum where everyone didn’t hate everyone else. I probably would have said, hey zikzak, what do you think about me making this category and gone from there.
If someone can explain to me what the subforum would look like, in terms of the mechanisms of how it would be moderated differently and not in terms of the hoped-for outcome, then I volunteer to write a first draft for an RFC as a starting point for people to argue about it. Writing stuff by committee is dumb. (This offer is not an endorsement of the subforum idea. I don’t even know enough about it to determine whether it is a good idea.)
However, make sure that what you want is possible under Discourse’s software.
So you thought I was lying when I already explained part of the context? I’m not the one who found himself in league with the shameless liars, remember.
They were discussing the myriad definitions of “trolling” in the context of how “trolls” should be treated, like I said. You know, the same shit you all should’ve done months ago? And I said Johnny also “admitted” to trolling the forum but his definition was so broad and vague that everybody is a troll. And I said that I agreed with Ked, though this was well before I was invited. This screenshot shows all that and I have no problem posting more as I get permission from the parties involved, but, I figured that was innocuous enough, but also info-loaded, to show without.
You thought I’d just randomly make some shit up so my Best Fren FORUM BFFs could win an internet fight?
But you all didn’t discus the myriad definitions of “trolling” in the context of how “trolls” should be treated, because,
there is no plain meaning of the word “troll(ing)” and that is precisely why you all are going HAM using it. It’s a loaded-language snarl-word designed to be an empty vessel. It’s linguistic question-begging designed to assign guilt without proof or definition. (See Marksman’s last post for just one example. He said we don’t need to agree on correct definitions of words. That’s pretty darn trollish itself!)
Basic textbook definitions piling the fuck up.
Maybe? Not everybody is a shameless liar.
A subforum like the half dozen that already exist here?
Who, Suzzer, Jman? You’re playing mighty fast and loose with that “we” here. Considering I’m in the middle of explaining this again, not sure what you want to hear. Does this example look like anything to you:
Replace “trolling” with “worst thing in the world (WTITW)”
Replace “Fidget” with “random anonymous person x (MrX)”
If I ask MrX what his definition of the WTITW is and MrX says “jaywalking”, and then later says “Oh man I did the WTITW”, we know MrX wasn’t actually “admitting” to doing the WTITW because he already said the WTITW is jaywalking, and we both know that isn’t the WTITW.
This is what Victoar meant when he kept saying “show me the trolling post” and the MENSA Meeting couldn’t even understand the request (until LG2, why he gets paid the big bux). He was saying to show him the actual WTITW, not what MrX thought was or for whatever reason labeled the WTITW. (sick unintentioanl callback to the theory-of-mind stuff)
Setting aside everything I’ve just said, if you want to extrapolate this hard (“this whole time” you had to have felt dirty typing that), I can’t stop you, but,
everybody who made an authoritative and definitive statement about the Top Secret PM without reading it (some proudly so!) was doing the most bad faith bullshit imaginable, and, like, AOFrantic just pretended he either couldn’t read at a fifth grade level or is psychotic after he got caught running his mouth, so maybe we should give one- or two-offs a pass? Empathy and forgiveness and shit.
Hm.
Ok.
And that didn’t give a Rhodes Scholar like you any pause huh?
For one, we have an adopted definition of trolling, dating back to a thread started by our boi @JT2:
For two, the “plain meaning of words” I was referencing was how, plainly, fidget was not making his posts in good faith based on what he said, even putting aside an ambiguous definition of trolling. His quotes plainly mean that his question asked in the covid thread was not a genuine one, and his policing of his opponents’ words, like “gaslighting,” “clique,” and his ongoing shtick about detente were all, in his own word, an “act” that he didn’t take seriously. Now, I mean, anyone could take a fair reading of his obviously-deliberately-obtuse shtick in the covid thread and see that he was deliberately being a dumbass. I played along, because it’s important to me to communicate accurate information about covid even to someone who’s deliberately being a dumbass for his own amusement, because people lurk here and I want to help them. Anyone can see that exchange was a reiteration of the classic cartoon:
Except that instead of calling him an idiot, I supplied helpful information, and instead of publicly making a scene, he took his “victory lap” to the group PM.
Even with your explanation (I had read your prior explanations, and no, they aren’t actually evidence in any real sense except if you consider unverifiable, unsworn testimony of a participant to be “evidence.” It’s not the sort of thing that an objective observer could really use to make sense of the situation unless they take your word as gospel for no good reason at all), the most charitable explanation I can come up with for why fidget made the post he did in the covid thread and then fistpumped for trolling it – granting your entire premise that it was amidst an ongoing, serious business discussion of what they wanted to consider “trolling” in their new forum – is that it was sort of a performance art, that he somehow could not think of any way to make an argument that his bad faith posts in the covid thread should (or should not, I don’t know what side he was on) fit the adopted definition of “trolling” without carrying it out himself for all PM thread participants to see. That’s cute and all. It strains credulity that he was literally unable to think of any way to put this into words in the PM conversation without putting it into practice, but it’s a cute explanation. I don’t get why I or any active participant or any lurker in the covid thread should tolerate someone deliberately making that thread worse so as to win an unrelated argument concerning totally different people. That, in my book, absolutely deserves a ban for violating our bad faith rule even trying to discern the best argument I can come up with for why he “trolled” the covid thread given your explanation for the context of the related quotes.
And of course, the performance in the covid thread and subsequent admission that got quoted from the PM thread is not the only bad faith fidget put forth. His word policing and “Gandhi” behavior he described as an “act” to deliberately rile up his opponents. Anyone could reasonably tell that this was bad faith, because no matter how peace-seeking he pretended to be, he plainly was weaponizing his act against his opponents while giving his allies free rein to commit the same transgressions he pretended to care about. Furthermore, your explanation about a serious discussion about trolling would not apply to this, or at least, even if it were part of a conversation on whether or not they’d want to allow this, it is plainly toxic to pretend to be a peace maker in deliberate service of further discord. It should absolutely not be allowed under our bad faith rule, and if this were in an effort to subject the forum to this sort of toxic performance so as to make an unrelated point to a separate audience is most unwelcome and should be banned.
Moving on,
No, an obvious and deliberate misconstruing of what I said. Almost everything I said to a micromanager was already public information, even if it could also be reasonably described as “saying bad things.” You set the bar awfully low with “saying bad things” about someone via PM, and that’s on you. I said them via PM because that is how I was asked for clarification, or perhaps because we once voted on and adopted:
In contrast to every instance of enforcement being subject to community referendum.
As for the rest, no, I’m not going to ban or out anyone who talks about moving to a new place. Anyone is free to go at any time, and anyone can start their own brand new forum at any time. If you or Keed or jal or Sabo or anyone I’ve ever banned or anyone I’ve ever liked or anyone else want to make their own new place, that’s their business, not mine. My issue is with shitting all over this one, and I have never, not once, had a conversation with anyone about making this place worse for the people who choose to be here, in stark contrast to the people who applauded or were complicit in fidget’s bullshit. It’s a claim I am unable to back up without handing over the keys to my account (obviously any PMs I post myself can be accused of being edited, groomed or selected while hiding the real salacious material), and I’m unwilling to give up the password to my account. If you think I’m lying, have me voted out as mod.
Assuming that intent is required to troll which is a huge stretch, you can’t really know someone’s intent unless they tell you what their intent was… oh wait.
These are two separate things, the “Gahndi act” was in reference to something else, but it sounds like you’re saying that if his opponents want to see him banned, but they can’t because he is being nice, and this riles them up, that is… Somehow also trolling?
That’s whatever though, what I’m really interested in the environment fostered where everybody is allowed to “troll the forum” over this. People didn’t read the thread when they had the chance, now they’re definitively stating what it’s about, down to incorrect specifics, and that’s not the pinnacle of bad faith?
If Sabo (or Ked, or whomever, remember, most hear are even unclear about who started the PM thread!) really had some master plan to expose all of this, that you all would behave in such a ridiculous manner with the slightest push… How on earth is that a bad thing?!?
Every snippet of the “private PM” you show just reminds everyone else how context is controlled by the editor. Every snippet that has text redacted by weird cropping or MS Paint reminds us that we aren’t part of that community and aren’t considered your equals.
But please, keep cherry picking from it to show us what we’ll be missing when your clique gets their invite-only sub forum.
Look man, I can understand not reading every word of a 6ix post. I’ve scrolled past plenty of them in this forum. But if you’re going to take shots at him, maybe read the actual posts? He literally says here that he’s posting other people’s PMs but doesn’t want to post entire messages or conversations because he doesn’t have permission from the parties involved!
I just can’t imagine why that group wouldn’t want to discuss these issues in an open forum where they can get constructive responses like these.
I really hate that I feel like I’m getting drawn into a “side” here because I hate that there are even sides here–why can’t we all just get along??? But it’s been eye-opening (and perplexing) to see so many posters that I’ve always thought were good posters dropping down to this level of bullshit. I can imagine how frustrating it is to get repeatedly banned while your posts are subject to replies like this.
Out of all the drama in this thread, SK’s post is the most troubling thing I have read so far. Reading Glenn Greenwald’s shit is legit infuriating to me, as he intends it to be, and it is unbelievable to me that people actually buy his BS but obviously we cannot stop someone from posting thoughts they legitimately believe.
Just to be clear, there was a concerted effort to invite anyone and everyone who was (1) posting on these topics and (2) didn’t seem obviously antagonistic. I would have happily added you and many others if you had been posting in the FBBV thread or any of the other relevant ones. Lots of people hate this stuff, so there was reluctance to drag in people who didn’t seem interested. I’m sorry you felt left out.
@6ix how am I supposed to think that you are acting in good faith if you are defending people who were not, have no remorse for discussing their clearly bad faith discussions, and are here JAQ and defining things to ‘understand and agree on terminology’ while ignoring the larger issue that the mutineers need to be thrown overboard.
You don’t have to agree with the mods to respect them, have a basic level of human empathy and appreciate that they are trying to help you. Are you remorseful that you didn’t pump the brakes on intentional trolling? Do you think it’s acceptable to coordinate personal attacks and edgelording to accomplish one’s goals relative to the forum? Do you think it’s reasonable for ME to believe you are having a good faith discussion here.
I’d like to believe that you see what’s up here but sincerely hoping that the moderators make what I feel are obvious decisions here and allow people to redeem themselves a few months from now after a long timeout. I feel if they aren’t capable of this the hopes for the community are poor because they neither respect themselves, their time or the other guests. Jmo
Yeah, being a GG and Taibi fan in 2021 is pretty wild.
But what Keed said about being a troll isn’t even remotely true. He admittedly trolled the shit out of that deflategate 2p2 thread and I believe a few other time on 2p2. I actually like Keed as a poster but i never know what level he is on lol
Fidget kicked off a COVID discussion with an article linking an unvaccinated soccer player’s heart issues to a COVID vaccine (which is why I responded). He then made very obtuse points about a paraphrase in the article. All responses were very polite and treated him as if he was posting in good faith. He then went into a PM thread and bragged about how he was fucking with the people and victory lapped, i dont know, people responding politely to his post with real answers and people not answering questions that didnt make a lot of sense, which we now know is because he was “just JAQng off”
Not like the guy should be executed, I didnt even vote for a perma, but defending his behavior is super confusing. I dont think any of the people posting have opined on a way to improve the forum experience as post anti-COVID vax tinged articles then waste peoples time following up on the subject with nonsense in a failed attempt to impress fellow travellers.
EDIT: This is what he posted to kick off the discussion. Eriksen wasn’t vaccinated. Then he linked to an article about heart issues with vaccines. Apparently all to own other posters. That is not defensible behavior.
Hopefully this is just disinformation.
Saw it linked where somebody was claiming Eriksen’s collapse was caused by a vaccine.
Note - these are not my views.
Look, it’s impossible for me or anyone to assess the veracity of your claims about the context of the covid bullshit based on disjoint, censored snapshots that don’t even include the posts in question. But even just taking you at your word, trying to win a debate against a slippery opponent is not a good reason for wasting everyone’s time with a bullshit question in an important thread.
No, I told you what I meant, and it wasn’t that I was mad that he was being nice.
