What's the deal with KPO?

POSTED BY: HKCavalier
UPDATED: Friday, June 7, 2013 19:26
VIEWED: 22000
PAGE 8 of 12

PREV PAGE 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 NEXT PAGE

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Sunday, June 2, 2013 9:46 PM

Someone could start an insult thread, but I think you might miss some of the more cunning ploys of some posters, but it could be a start.

I don't like the insults and the dehumanising that goes on. He/She started it is no excuse. Everyone is responsible for their own behaviour. You don't have to respond like with like.

1KIKI

Sunday, June 2, 2013 10:01 PM

"He/She started it is no excuse."

'Who started it' is the difference between aggression and self-defense. I consider it a valid and useful distinction, as do most people I suspect.

Also, social rejection and social isolation are social tools built in to human behavior as a social species. If they can continue to rely on the self-imposed endless patience of 'liberals' and continue to exercise their social aggression on the group, what is the motivation for them to alter their socially predatory behavior?

But personally, though they're morally reprehensible people who support death, torture and destruction to enrich themselves and their group; and are socially predatory in furthering their agendas - I don't claim a moral agency in what I do. Due to my background - which I don't make much of but which nevertheless exists - I have a wellspring of rage. After years of drilling for it, they have tapped into it (tempered only by time and laziness). I hope to ensure they they enjoy all that I have for them.

They have targeted us first. I have responded in my way and targeted them. It's that simple.

MAL4PREZ

Monday, June 3, 2013 2:03 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
Mal4,

We've reached a truly fascinating impasse. Why is it so hard for you to admit that you think Jongs' and AURaptor are bad people?

For a savvy, thinking person you really are stuck inside your own head on this one. You have decided that you know all, and nothing I say will sway you.

How the hell do you claim to know what I think? That is damned presumptuous, and I have to say that between this and Sig's rape thing, I have lost a lot of respect that I used to have for a few posters here. If you would please pay me the respect (and thence earn mine back) of not assuming that you are omnipotent, I will explain.

I see a few possibilities.

1. The poster known as Rappy is not a real person but a sock invented by those who have been known to invent socks. This would explain oh so much about him. (I could expand on this, but I won't.) It would not make him a bad person because he would not be a real person. I don't feel bad poking him because it clearly causes him no pain. You know, because he's not real and feels no pain.

2. The Rap is a real person with some serious issues with logical thought when it comes to politics, probably due to his upbringing. Though in many other ways he is entertaining and likeable and a GOOD PERSON, and I'd sit and have a beer and talk to him about Firefly any day, I find it impossible to have a rational discussion of politics with him. I don't feel bad poking him in RWED because if it bothered him, he wouldn't try so hard to invite it. I don't believe he is a bad person and I wish him no harm, (Did you read that? Could you read it again just to be sure?) but I have absolutely no use for him when it comes to rational discussion.

Furthermore, I will counter his attempts to ruin my rational discussion by mocking him. Because, first of all, this tone of conversation started with him, and second because it doesn't hurt him. He comes back to it, again and again with apparent glee.

You seem incapable of allowing either of these options. Are you capable of seeing people as complex creatures that might be unbearable in some ways without being bad people overall? Cause that's how I think of many many people. Even the he-devil Cheney. I despise what the man has done, yes I even despise the man himself, but I wouldn't say he is a bad person (the way you seem to be painting things) or evil or belongs in hell. I'm sure he had his reasons for doing what he did. I know people like that in real life.

I believe that very very few people do bad things because they are inherently bad, therefore there are very few bad people. But I know there are people whose behavior is not acceptable. So I don't accept it.

Are you capable of recognizing these shades of gray?

As for being a bully, honey, I am real curious as to why you don't apply that term to Rappy. He's been MUCH more abusive on these boards than me. Why are you so happy to see him as some kind of victim here?

It's like the little wimpy kid turned around and punched the bully in the nose. Who do you call a "bad person" there? You gonna call the wimpy kid a bully?

Cause sorry, I don't buy the way you're selling the Rapster as some poor little victim here. If that's really what you think, you must not have been actually reading any RWED threads over the past 8 years.

And please, again, don't go presuming that you know what I think. That's just about the most insulting thing you can do.

BYTEMITE

Monday, June 3, 2013 2:24 AM

Interesting. Mal4Prez, I don't think I've had the awareness to observe your interactions with AuRaptor and others - other people interacting with AuRaptor tends to dominate the discussion, and I tend to not follow most of the discussions very well.

However I like what you are saying here, and it is similar to what I think about how to handle conversations with people I disagree with politically. I often make a snark now and then, though I try not to offend with my snarks.

I am not sure about the mocking, if that's the same thing as what I'm describing. I could try to consider board behaviour in the frame of both sides mocking each other, without malice. However, I'm not sure that making that assumption or acting on it is a good precedent, though you might truly have no malice to offer.

KWICKO

Monday, June 3, 2013 2:32 AM

Quote:
Furthermore, I will counter his attempts to ruin my rational discussion by mocking him. Because, first of all, this tone of conversation started with him, and second because it doesn't hurt him. He comes back to it, again and again with apparent glee.

As I've pointed out time and time again, our best weapon against zealotry and fundamentalism is mockery and ridicule. Wait - our TWO best weapons are mockery, ridicule, and - hold on - our THREE best weapons are...

Honestly, I didn't expect this sort of Spanish Inquisition!

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

KWICKO

Monday, June 3, 2013 2:43 AM

Quote:
Posted by ByteMite:

I often make a snark now and then, though I try not to offend with my snarks.

I gave up the pretense long ago, because no matter what you say, someone will get offended by it. I cannot live in fear of offending the easily offended.

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Monday, June 3, 2013 2:43 AM

Quote:

'Who started it' is the difference between aggression and self-defense. I consider it a valid and useful distinction, as do most people I suspect.

Interesting as I generally have an issue with how self defense is often defied in the US. I am surprised that there are places where killing someone is justifiable because they have come to steal your widescreen tv.

Nevertheless I don't see these actions as self defense, but revenge or vengance and I think there is a difference. Revenge just creates cycles of abusive behaviour with no one taking responsibility, because everyone else claims the other started it or does more of it. The only way out of the cycle is to not play the game by the abuser's rules.

Each of us here chooses how we respond and to what we respond to. At any time you or I can walk away and not come back if we don't like the tone/content of this board, or if it triggers stuff in us that is painful.

Or we can choose to ignore certain posters or topics or posts that we think might be fruitful. Or we can choose to post to unreasonable posts in a reasonable manner, or with as much reason we can muster.

I can honestly say when the threads descend into bickering 'you idiot' 'no, you are' I just scroll past and don't read.

Quote:
Also, social rejection and social isolation are social tools built in to human behavior as a social species. If they can continue to rely on the self-imposed endless patience of 'liberals' and continue to exercise their social aggression on the group, what is the motivation for them to alter their socially predatory behavior?

There is no evidence that responding with similar behaviour changes anyones behaviour. There is evidence that it will in fact escalate poor behaviour. On the other hand, its hard to continue to be a bastard if others are being reasonable. Please note that I say 'hard' and not impossible.

Quote:
But personally, though they're morally reprehensible people who support death, torture and destruction to enrich themselves and their group; and are socially predatory in furthering their agendas - I don't claim a moral agency in what I do. Due to my background - which I don't make much of but which nevertheless exists - I have a wellspring of rage. After years of drilling for it, they have tapped into it (tempered only by time and laziness). I hope to ensure they they enjoy all that I have for them.

They have targeted us first. I have responded in my way and targeted them. It's that simple.

And there lies the excuses of those who also use torture, death and destruction. "Because they did it first" It's the beginning of the end when reasonable people start to think this way.

MAL4PREZ

Monday, June 3, 2013 3:10 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by BYTEMITE:
Interesting. Mal4Prez, I don't think I've had the awareness to observe your interactions with AuRaptor and others - other people interacting with AuRaptor tends to dominate the discussion, and I tend to not follow most of the discussions very well.

However I like what you are saying here, and it is similar to what I think about how to handle conversations with people I disagree with politically. I often make a snark now and then, though I try not to offend with my snarks.

I am not sure about the mocking, if that's the same thing as what I'm describing. I could try to consider board behaviour in the frame of both sides mocking each other, without malice. However, I'm not sure that making that assumption or acting on it is a good precedent, though you might truly have no malice to offer.

OK, that's something like what I'm trying to express. If I thought I was actually hurting Rappy, I would never poke him like I do now and then.

If I may be so bold, I say things to you now and then that I know you do not like. The difference is, I believe 100% that you are real and the things you feel are real, and I am very much aware of the effect my posts might have on you. You may get a little... shall we say erratic?... at times, but that is real and understandable and it's what you are feeling and I would never insult you for it. I try to present alternate takes on situations that I think might help you. I try to do it honestly and gently.

Wulfie is another though very different example. This is a person I don't like and probably never will. There's likely not a thing that Wulf and I would enjoy talking to each other about. (I could be wrong.) But I see reality in his posts, a real person with reasons for what he's saying, and I try to be careful not to dig too deep when I reply to him. I think I could do harm there.

Rappy? No. I don't see that anything anyone says here ever does him harm. This, more than anything, convinces me that he is unreal. He's either an intentional invention or a real person with some bizarre partitioning of his brain that makes him untouchable.

Did you ever notice that the mocking headed his way is generic and impersonal? What do we really know about him, and what would we say to really hurt him if that's what we were after? For all the 1000s of posts he's made here, I still have no good feel for who he is as a human being. If I wanted to actually hurt him (which i don't) I wouldn't know what to say.

Really, there's some seriously lack of reality about him. I admit, it's a little fascinating. He's like a puzzle. Extra annoying because I can't figure it out.

MAL4PREZ

Monday, June 3, 2013 3:12 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
There is no evidence that responding with similar behaviour changes anyones behaviour. There is evidence that it will in fact escalate poor behaviour. On the other hand, its hard to continue to be a bastard if others are being reasonable. Please note that I say 'hard' and not impossible.

Can't disagree with any of this.

I add the caveat that this is the internet, where escalation of bad behavior is easier times 10, and the continuing to be a bastard thing is easier times 100.

1KIKI

Monday, June 3, 2013 4:44 AM

"There is no evidence that responding with similar behaviour changes anyones behaviour."

There is. Some time ago a number of us pointedly ignored lil' rappy for weeks at a time. He actually moderated his posts for the better to gain a response from people. That was an exercise of one of the options: social isolation. And it worked.

OTOH, having been on the board from the very beginning, I've seen probably thousands of person-hours if not tens of thousands of person-hours wasted every year on these posters. Of reasoned, factual, documented and validated argument about any number of topics: poverty and death. Muslims. wiretapping. the death penalty. birth control. abortion. Bush's magical shrinking economy and magical ballooning deficit. Iraq's magical disappearing WMDs. gun control. human rights. global warming. health care. drugs. homosexuality. ... you name it, we've been there, done that as a general group of people on a website, many many times over. After all those facts, and all that reason, and all that patience by all those people trying to rationally discuss the topics - do YOU detect any change in the behavior of our rightards? If anything, they're worse.

Let's take a look at our little jongsie specifically. What was it that ticked him off? It, according to him, was Nikki's posts. So, did Niki post snark? No. Did she call him or anyone names? no. Did she flood the board? no. Is she willing to discuss anything she posts with anyone who has something reasonable to say? yes. All she did - sans snark, sans name-calling, sans partisanship, sans trolling - was post things she was interested in in the hopes of sparking a conversation.

That's what set our little jongsie into his widdle tantwum - was a poster posting things they were interested in in the hopes of having a discussion.

Oh the horror, the horror. How COULD she do THAT to him? No WONDER he went off the deep end. She deserved it. Serves her right.

So, in the midst of all this, SignyM very patiently, consistently, replied to many of Jongie's posts with a brief topical reply and the end-line: please discuss. And what did Jongsie do? Do I need to repost it again, or do you remember the vile attack he launched on the only person who was treating him like a reasonable person at the time?

And what did SignyM do to deserve that? Well, she replied reasonably and asked for discussion on topics that HE posted and was presumably interested in discussing. I have to say, she was almost as bad as Nikki in provoking that poor widdle man into such a fit. She should hang her head in shame.

I've had it with them. They launch an attack, and if I'm around I guarantee I will escalate right back. And no, it's not a moral stand. I'm not basing it on how 'evil' they are (though they are all morally bankrupt but too cowardly to do anything to anyone except by proxy). This is what I choose because I deeply loathe them and everything they do.

PREV PAGE 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 NEXT PAGE