REAL world event discussions
POSTED BY: SignyM
UPDATED: Wednesday, December 2, 2009 00:43
VIEWED: 6855
PAGE 4 of 10
DREAMTROVE
Quote:I also have my list of who's sane(r) and who's not, and who is more opinion-free and who's not. And I suspect we ALL have lists like that in our heads. ETA: But I'd be curious as to what your list looks like. Care to share?
Sig, can't say that you have a high portion of opinion free, real world event posts in your total score. Nothing personal, just saying, glass houses, throwing stones, that sort of thing... John is not the craziest person here, not by a long shot. Okay, maybe he's not the sanest, but this means a couple of things... People might be surprised by where I rank them, but I'm not going to share that information, just that John Lee is a relative sane individual.
Also, you seem to have developed a grotch against me for no reason that I can tell, sideswiping me in various threads that I haven't even posted in, name-calling etc. Why is that?
JOHN LEE
Saying "It's in the Telegraph" does not absolve YOU of the responsibility of sifting the dreck from the real. Hell, man, I saw an article about a mink coat which came to life, bit its owner to death and ran away. (Word!) But I'm not gonna post it as "Secret Jewish-Nazi-British zombie experiment run amok in Budapest". If you depend on your "sources" to sift the real from the unreal, don't you realize that you have just given "them" the power? For your own safety, try to keep at least one foot in the real, real world. Retain that power for yourself, m'kay?
ALL
I suspect that PN is using this site as an alternate "news outlet", possibly to get around being blocked by other outlets. I believe he is abusing the intent of the forum. Nonetheless, I don't think he should be banned or even shifted off to the malicious thread. I WOULD like his posts be tagged though, so that I can scroll past them instead of having to open some of them up to see who originated it or - WORSE, IMO - scanning past other posts because they "sound" like PN. A little organization can get us past his forum abuse.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
On the nose, as far as I'm concerned. And the idea that he offers much "real world" material is almost as funny as the concept that he WANTS to "discuss" anything he puts up.
I suspect that PN is using this site as an alternate "news outlet", possibly to get around being blocked by other outlets. I believe he is abusing the intent of the forum. Nonetheless, I don't think he should be banned or even shifted off to the malicious thread. I WOULD like his posts be tagged though, so that I can scroll past them instead of having to open some of them up to see who originated it
And I LOVE Anthony's idea: Quote:
The other forum I was on did that, and made it SO much easier; my only problem was the delight in some I had blocked in going after me, so I would read someone else's response and curiosity would get the better of me, which always turned out badly...that's on me, nobody else.
A good forum software would allow you to flag people who don't interest you, and it would conceal all of their threads and posts from your view, thus ending the distraction.
The software there didn't hide the THREADS, tho', only the posts, so it doesn't change his spamming the list with sometimes MANY (4?!?!?) threads in one day and knocking everything else down. But it solves half the problem, and since his threads are pretty easy to spot, and/or back out of if I don't realize they're him, that would be a GREAT idea!
Anyone tell me where to send Haken the contribution, I'm in!
I repeat, just for the sake of argument, however, that "legally" speech isn't "free" here because it is a privately-owned site. Many sites block "forbidden" words, and a large percentage of what PN posts would be blocked.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Frem,
I take your point that PN may be going for anger, I know that the US bombing has chaos as its goal, rather than conquest.
That said, I don't buy PN as a jewish mole. I've seen this done before, but only within the neonazi set. John ties zionists to the Nazis, and even if he makes errors in doing so, he is not entirely wrong. This is a secret that a jewish elite would *not* want to spill, even in the process of trying to discredit a message.
It's possible tho.
Pizmo,
I never said that he "discussed" real world events, only that he posts them. He discusses very little. He carpetbombs. The initial posts are often real world events. Sure, he posts a lot of pure opinion threads, but as I said, he fires a lot, so he's bound to hit something. He posts more real world events than most of us, maybe than anyone, even if it's not more by % of posts.
And no, he doesn't discuss them, in general. Occasionally he does
SignyM
I concur, I just don't think it's relevant to the issue at hand. It's not a question of whether a poster is bonkers, politically slanted, or opinionated, but whether or not they post real world events vs. opinion.
Pirate News posts a lot of real world events, and yes, he also posts a lot of opinion. But I don't see a lot of fire here coming from people who post significantly more real world events, and a lot of people here post a lot of opinion. Whether or not that opinion is more cogent was not the issue at hand. It was just a matter of posting real world events.
If you disagree with John's opinions, you're probably close to a unanimous majority. Myself, I avoid major disagreements altogether, and only nitpick whether or not Moloch is an owl, etc. In short, factual disagreements. I'm not going to debate the validity of the state of Israel.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Gotta take issue, here, Pizmo.
Some of those, despite his ludicrous titles, were actually quite worthy of discussion, particular the cop tasering that kid, and the TSA being forced to back off - sometimes folk around here are a little too quick to dismiss the message cause of the messenger.
I don't blame em too much, but Sturgeons law does have that ten percent, yanno.
Anthony ?
I already use software that allows such a blacklist, but I question the utility of incorporating it into the forum itself - not just because of the technical difficulty, but because some folk wanna bang their little drums without ever hearing a word of dissent, and that would allow them to ensure it, which would not only cripple discussion, but would actually ENCOURAGE them to spout off their intolerant hate, because they'd not be forced to deal with us mocking it and picking it apart.
That's one of those things that only sounds like a good idea till you think it all the way through.
That's *almost* as bad as the hate-friendly "moderation" on certain boards ( THR comes to mind ) which not only allows such things to fester, but actively bans calling folk out on it.
Yeah, I got banned offa THR for calling out someone who was advocating the death of all muslims, pointing out that he was essentially calling for genocide, and suggesting that helping them throw out their own radicals was a better idea - and the mod in question took MORE issue with that than he did for the genocide comment...
I did find amusement that their server admin, who was arabic and muslim in descent, pulled a fast on one them when they tried some funny business with potential financial support from some hard-right wackjobs, although he was no more innocent of anything than they were, not even Oleg - given that was the first time I've ever known him to lie to me.
Trust me, Anthony - incorporating the ability to blacklist anyone who disagrees with you would kill the value of this forum pretty quick.
Not that I am unsympathetic to peoples "issues" with the guy, but I kinda like our pet crazy even when he does get on our nerves - and just can't stomach the idea of pushin him out the airlock, yanno ?
-F
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I don't think the comparison between being able to "block" offensive people if one chooses to and having a mod is accurate. I see a HUGE difference.
As to Quote:
those people go right on banging their drums whether they get dissent or not. Conversely, if they were blocked, fewer people would reply and they wouldn't get the attention they seek. PN being a prime example. Wouldn't stop them, but it would help in keeping their threads from rising to the top as much, and give those of us who would like it more peace.
some folk wanna bang their little drums without ever hearing a word of dissent
I love a good discussion/debate, and could jump into one after it began if it was about something worthwhile, yet still not deal with the uglier parts. People like PN DO only want to bang their drum and spend hours posting long diatribes, complete with videos. Blocked by each individual who doesn't want to deal with it would reduce their posts to one line, which would be nice, in my opinion.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
DT: There are several parts to the Real World Events Discussion header. One is that the events posted are in the real world. The other is that they're posted for discussion. John's posts are (by percentage) neither real, nor is he open to discussing them.
Quote:I can see discussing whether Moloch is normally represented as an owl although it seems a pointless topic. But isn't discussing whether Moloch "is" an owl like discussing how many angels can dance on the head of a pin? Unless you accept the actuality of Moloch (or angels) it hardly seems factual. I think what you're saying is that you're not going to challenge people's basic vision of reality, but work within it. ETA: But that defeats the purpose of the forum. If PN is here to challenge our view of reality then we can challenge his.
.. only nitpick whether or not Moloch is an owl, etc. In short, factual disagreements.
I understand "insanity" is a dangerous political concept. What most of us consider as "reality" is often what is "socially acceptable"- what we are TOLD is real by our parents, teachers, businesses, and government. It's far too easy to label rebellion or paradigm-challenging insight as insane. Freud labeled HIS patients insane when they recalled childhood abuse, and came up with a twisted theory about the psyche to explain away the inconvenient fact that proper, middle-class parents were abusive monsters. Today, people are called "depressed" when they respond very naturally to their powerlessness in our current dystopia, and handed little pills to bring them back to the unrealistic optimism which is considered "normal" in this fucked-up society.
Also, we have this trope (trope, right?) of the insane who is really wise, who sees things that most people don't. Maybe there's some truth in that... maybe it takes a touch of "insanity" to reject the paradigms we're so immersed in we can't see any differently.
Which is why I don't want PN banned from the forum, simply labeled. That way, we could do what we normally do in face-to-face life: We could identify right away who was talking without having to listen to them first.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Sig: Ooo, well spoken...I agree with every word. And right on with Quote:
, which is the point several of us have been trying to make, but not nearly as cogently.
John's posts are (by percentage) neither real, nor is he open to discussing them.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Also, we have this trope (trope, right?) of the insane who is really wise, who sees things that most people don't. Maybe there's some truth in that... maybe it takes a touch of "insanity" to reject the paradigms we're so immersed in we can't see any differently.
Hmm, if you're asking, it could be a few tropes.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/CassandraTruth
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MadOracle
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AgentMulder
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/YouHaveToBelieveMe
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/CryingWolf
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I think people misunderstand the concept of 'free speech'. It's NOT a blanket right to say whatever you want, wherever you want, whenever you want, however you want. I cannot punch you in the face and claim it is my 'free expression' of what I think of you.
This is what's in the constitution:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
YOUR free speech rights go only as far as lack of federal law abridging them. Any other abridgement by any other entity is fair game. That is, at least, according to the 'strict constitutionalists' who are the current Supreme Court majority.
***************************************************************
Silence is consent.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:Quote:
Also, we have this trope (trope, right?) of the insane who is really wise, who sees things that most people don't. Maybe there's some truth in that... maybe it takes a touch of "insanity" to reject the paradigms we're so immersed in we can't see any differently.
Hmm, if you're asking, it could be a few tropes
Actually (the DB is down right now..) it would be CloudCuckooLander and The CloudCuckooLander was right.
Which is all the more amusing since technically imma loon as well and my original monniker was C-6/Cuckoobird.
-F
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME