Query re: 'Info bombing' by Niki2

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)

Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
I like to reply to threads that are not purely ideologically driven. Or if they are ideological in nature, then I look for some balance in the presentation. I really don't want or desire to engage in name-calling or fights. Also, posts that have a lot of web cites don't excite me either. I and perhaps others, don't have the time to click them and read them. I look for a fair discussion, no flame-work. If you do flame you are only going to get responses from those who agree or partially agree with you, or those that like the nasty stuff....that is unless that's what you really want. Posting something and having everyone agree with you is a bit boring and self-serving, and it alienates those with a different point of view, unless it's done in an inviting way that attracts the opposition without demeaning the opposition before they start. I've been guilty of that kind of stuff myself in the past, not too much for a while now. And I've had some nice inter-action from some who I never was able to communicate with in a civil manner before as a result. So Niki, you keep posting thread topics all you want.

Have to say, as someone who's disagreed quite vociferously with Jongsie in the past, he's got a point, and I'm in agreement with him here.

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 23, 2009 10:35 AM

FREMDFIRMA

Pffth, there's tons of fascinating stuff in the world to discuss and frankly I wouldn't mind seeing more - whether or not one admits it the can learn a whole lot from those discussions not just about the topic, but each other, and people in general.

Hell, one of the reasons I lurked so long when I first came here was not being able to relate to "normal" folk so well due to lack of understanding.

So long as the discussion itself is reasonable and informative I could care less if we're discussin an eight page apple pie recipe, honestly - and even when the discussion is outside my competence completely I still enjoy watching and might throw my two cents in on a side issue I do know a bit about.

Besides, I'd not be so quick to take the words of those who's priority seems to be preventing rational discussion with anything like validity on the topic at hand any more than I would give credence to a burglar whining about me oppressing them when I chase em off the property, yes ?

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 23, 2009 10:39 AM

Yup. Post away, Niki dear, and those who are interested will jump in.

I've got some musings on Pakistan that are still percolating in my brainpan, and I'm about to be out of town, but believe you me, there ARE some things to discuss!

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 23, 2009 10:39 AM

JONGSSTRAW

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Have to say, as someone who's disagreed quite vociferously with Jongsie in the past, he's got a point, and I'm in agreement with him here.

'As gracious as that is, it's probably best if I stay out of your world.' Someone I admire once said that, and I've actually tried at times to do just that. But I come back, always come back. This board is special to me. I'm not the smartest guy in the world, but also not the dumbest.....my talent in life (which affords me something of a career) has been the ability to recognize talent, and to recognize intelligence in others. No board that I've ever been involved with has been both so enjoyable and so frustrating as this one.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 23, 2009 1:42 PM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Is it info-bombing to post threads on subjects that might be of interest to discuss?

Not to me.

The only things I'd ask is that if folks post content from another source, rather than their own thoughts, that they provide a link or cite for it. Also, if folk are posting other people's stuff, I'd wish they'd put a little of their own comments or opinions with it, not just throw it out there cold.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 23, 2009 2:47 PM

I would mostly agree with Jong, but I'd say "Bring your own filter."

Topics of interest are criticized by no one. Topics with a political slant are less so, but still readable and sometimes interesting, particularly if they are topics in which the poster is unaware of the bias, or the bias is not a major point of the post. Posts which exist solely to support an ideological position, I generally ignore.

It was I who made the comment on Niki's posts, but in my defense, it was in response to her claim to attempt to out-post or match-post with Pirate News.

Even Pirate News has called his own posts infobombing. Anyone trying to do the same has to be aware that they are entering that category.

Not everything Niki posts falls into this category, neither does everything that PN posts. I find John is being most sincere when there are no pictures, links or long quotes.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 23, 2009 3:35 PM

FREMDFIRMA

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
I'd wish they'd put a little of their own comments or opinions with it, not just throw it out there cold.

Agreed - I've specifically requested this of some folk at times cause I'd like to discuss it with THEM, and want somewhere to start with that, cause if I wanted to argue with the author of the material I'd go do that.

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 23, 2009 3:56 PM

I seldom post articles, but when I post issues, I don't usually post my opinion first, because if I do, I'll get responses to my opinion, when really what I want to hear is other people's opinions. I usually wait, and then post my opinion later.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 23, 2009 5:08 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
I seldom post articles, but when I post issues, I don't usually post my opinion first, because if I do, I'll get responses to my opinion, when really what I want to hear is other people's opinions. I usually wait, and then post my opinion later.

That's valid, too.

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, December 24, 2009 11:21 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Geezer:

Quote:
The only things I'd ask is that if folks post content from another source, rather than their own thoughts, that they provide a link or cite for it. Also, if folk are posting other people's stuff, I'd wish they'd put a little of their own comments or opinions with it, not just throw it out there cold.

I hear you. I’ve been attempting to find articles of interest that people might like discussing, so I guess they’re thrown out there cold. Will attempt to do as you suggest in future. I haven’t posted links to the things I put up recently because I didn’t think they were controversial enough to need them, but I always attempt to do so when debating; I will add cites when starting threads of interest in future.

DT:

Quote:
It was I who made the comment on Niki's posts, but in my defense, it was in response to her claim to attempt to out-post or match-post with Pirate News.

Again a falsehood. Is it memory or, as seems more likely, do you read things through the veil of your prejudice? I was taunted by PN thusly:

Quote:
So you're admitting you have nothing intelligent to say about anything in the Real World, thus cannot start your own RWED threads?

That's pretty lame

To which I replied

Quote:
I'll try to post more stuff that might be of interest; maybe if I'm sick of PN's slathering and suggest others post other things, I should start by doing it more myself.

YOU then wrote

Quote:
If you don't want to be classified along side PN, then stop competing for the spot.

If you are going to accuse me of things, please make some attempt to be accurate.

Basically, I would sincerely appreciate it if you stopped claiming I have said things which I have not.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, December 24, 2009 4:20 PM

Nik,

you can make fun of my memory problems, but no, that was not the thread. I think it was 6 of 9 where you stated that you wanted to keep up with PN, and PN has said many many times that he is basically infobombing the board.

Please don't waste my time. If you have something to discuss, discuss it, but no, in the future I won't respond to your personal attacks. I just lack the will to care.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, December 28, 2009 8:21 PM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Wow, DT, you've really got a hard-on where I'm concerned, it would seem! I WAS quoting the "Six of Nine" thread precisely, to show you that NOWHERE did I ever say I wanted to keep up with PN, merely that if I was looking for people to post more interesting things in RWE, I should do so myself as well.

I didn't "make fun" of any memory problems you might have (didn't know you had any), that wasn't an attack! I was asking whether it was faulty memory (we all have them, you know) or whether you read what I posted (or remembered what I posted) through the veil of your own prejudice. So I quoted the explicit exchanges you were harking back to, by way of showing you that I NEITHER SAID NOR WISH to "compete" with PN.

It's called "clarifying", there was no attack; and yes, I will defend myself when someone says something false about me or misquotes me in such a way as to mischaracterize my motives. I don't care if you respond or not, but I will clear up things I know to be misconceptions, misunderstandings of faleshoods. It's what I believe in. And I WILL respond to personal falsehoods, it's not a waste of time for me to defend myself when someone says something untrue about me to others.

Attacks are another matter; most of them are ridiculous and I try not to respond. At one time I respected you, so your personal attacks meant more to me than those of some other people I dismiss here. Even those I clarify, but you seem bent on misquoting or misrepresenting me pretty consistently lately. I would appreciate it if you could possibly stop; I will respond as little as I can in future. But it's my right to disagree or defend myself if I feel the need.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, December 29, 2009 2:42 AM

RIVERLOVE

PN ruins this board in a multitude of ways. There is no reason or justification for the hateful nonsense he posts in great abundance other than he is mentally ill. On other boards, he would have had his trash pulled off the site, and ultimately he would be banned from posting. He advocates hate and death, and he propagates lies.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, December 29, 2009 3:25 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Riverlove:
PN ruins this board in a multitude of ways. There is no reason or justification for the hateful nonsense he posts in great abundance other than he is mentally ill. On other boards, he would have had his trash pulled off the site, and ultimately he would be banned from posting. He advocates hate and death, and he propagates lies.

Well, there IS a reason for it, just not one most of us are comfortable with. He's a spambot, pure and simple. Sure, he's human and sitting at a keyboard, but at heart he's nothing more or less than a spambot aimed at plastering every site he visits with his own unique brand of spam. His goal is to gain traffic via clickthroughs to his own site, while at the same time to get paid for visits to the sites he links to, as well as to move his own site and those that pay him up in the Google rankings, thereby guaranteeing them even more traffic, so he can get more ad revenue.

You can choose to click on any of his links, or not. I generally try to avoid doing so, but will succumb now and again.

In honesty, the very best thing EVERYBODY could do to stop PN dead in his tracks would be to simply refuse to click on any of his links. As his revenue dries up, so do his posts. Still, it's damned hard to NOT comment on some of the crap he posts.

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, December 29, 2009 5:32 AM

River,

What Mike said.

Mike,

You beat me to it.

Actually, to be honest, gotta add one detail. PN gains points in the system if the pages containing those links get page views.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, December 29, 2009 5:32 AM

Ack, double post.

Since I have a free post I just thought of an Uh-Oh. The end result of my logic of PN's threads is that if we stop him from posting them or stop visiting them, he will just spam the most popular threads.

I'm currently designing a forum, and oppose the idea of mods, but I also oppose PN's carpetbombing of threads. My disagreement with the content of those threads isn't the point: it disrupts the discussion.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, December 29, 2009 8:14 AM

BYTEMITE

moog. I'm distracted for a week with my brother coming home from New York and trying a bunch of vegan dessert recipes, and I missed a big one. Wish I'd been around to try to keep things from escalating.

I think what we're seeing here is the clash of two different posting styles and ways of using this forum.

Everyone expresses an opinion, which they try to back up with the facts they are familiar with, in a manner they are comfortable with. For example, I don't use cites or references much because I don't know or try to claim much, I mostly approach every issue from a logic or intuitive stance. Wikipedia and google tend to be the sum of my research capacity, and when someone has better facts or background, I bow to their expertise.

The key difference in this case between you and DT is in WHY the opinions are expressed. For some, opinions are an expression of their ideological preferences, for others, they'd prefer to approach every issue as neutrally as possible with an eye for finding and solving problems.

Personally, I think both are valid forms of discussion, and everyone adds to the meta-conversation in their own way. Just because one person tends to fall more on the opinion expressing side of the line really doesn't warrant them a comparison to any other member or necessarily an accusation of info-bombing.

I don't find you guilty of info-bombing Niki, though you certainly has an ideological slant. And yeah, those of us who don't consider themselves partisan may sometimes not be interested if the ideological slant is the major factor of a given posting. There's been a few articles from some left wing writers that seem to pretty much be about "why the right wing sucks." The right wing does suck, so does the left wing. What do I say to that? You can go ahead and post your articles, since you like them, but you have to recognize that by doing so you ARE limiting your audience.

You also sometimes take things personally. Perhaps it was warranted. I don't think you deserved to be accused of anything, particularly info-bombing. But when DT says that you are mostly defined by your ideology, and that when you're upset/insulted some of your arguing style involves making other people feel guilty and a bit of twisting context and the other poster's intentions, well, he has a point. I don't think you're being manipulative, because like I said it's mostly when you feel insulted or upset and it's difficult for anyone to be perfectly objective when they feel insulted and upset.

This thread, for example, you've presented yourself initially as wanting advice on topic posting and avoiding the info-bombing label, but you actually wanted to bring up these accusations so you could defend yourself. You're not wrong to do so, and you're entitled to a defense, but I don't think your intentions here are your stated intentions. Some posters, depending on their background and perspectives and their previous interactions with you might see this differently than other posters. DT sees this differently than I do, he sees this as malicious, like you started this thread to attack his credibility or something. Context and perspective. Some people, when you ask them for cites, they're going to feel like you're disbelieving them and that you're accusing them of falsehoods.

I think that's what happened here. DT, who doesn't have a whole lot of time to go looking for cites felt you were calling him a liar, and he snapped at you by calling you an info bomber. You got hurt, and you posted this thread. By this way the fight would keep going until you begin to wonder if you're really welcome around here, or DT decides that this is all a product of your ideological expression and that he should just ignore you. I suspect both of those scenarios right now are very close to happening, until the situation calms down. For that reason, I'm not going to post in this thread any more beyond this.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, December 29, 2009 9:00 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Ahhh, thank you Byte. You helped me understand some things. I THINK the posts (or most of them) that you're referencing of mine which are "ideological" and trash the right are probably the columns from Mark Morford, who is DEFINITELY over the top ideologically, but aside from my agreeing with him a lot of the time, I also find his writing style really good and think sometimes some here might find his stuff amusing. I make no apologies for that, and I DEFINITELY understand the lack of interest by those who don't agree with him.

Beyond that, I do try hard to find issues of interest, and put them up for potential discussion while I have no opinion on them. I think what threads I START are relatively 50/50 in that respect, if not more non-ideologically balanced. My POSTS in other threads are a different matter, they're certainly opinionated!

I'm definitely not being consciously manipulative. As to this thread, I can't make anyone believe one thing or another. For me, the accusation worried me (I don't THINK it "hurt"), as I know we can't always be aware of how we come across, and I wanted to know if what I started as threads was considered ideologically slathering the topics list, as I believe PNs are. I don't want to do that.

It was in no way INTENDED as attacking DT, it was a question about which I was seeking feedback. I can see how it would be viewed as directed at DT, as he was the one who made the initial accusation. But I didn't mean it maliciously, whether anyone believes that or not.

If the responses I had received from those I respect were to the effect that I DID seem to be info-bombing, I would look at what I wanted to put up to start a thread more carefully; that was why I asked. I'm sure there was some defensiveness attached to it, as that accusation really "got" to me and the last thing I want to do is come across as another PN!

I'm in no way thinking of leaving, just to clear thar up. The really nasty attacks I got elsewhere were a completely different matter from what I have received here, and I'm capable of ignoring those here who truly have it in for me (NOT DT, by the way, I just think he's become prejudiced, most likely for some of the reasons you elcidated), or giving back some.

I ask for cites on things I question because I want to be able to decide for myself, and yes, I have difficulty with DT making flat statements which seem outside the realm of reason TO ME, so would like to know where I can find the information he got that led to his feeling they are fact. I realize I will get none, and have changed how I view what he writes. I will agree when I agree and disagree when I disagree and let it go at that.

Thank you, Byte.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, December 29, 2009 9:20 AM

Niki

Hatchet, let's bury it. We got into just firing at one another. We were not the first people to do so on this forum by a long shot, and we certainly won't be the last.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, December 29, 2009 1:54 PM

PIRATENEWS

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:

I wanted to know if what I started as threads was considered ideologically slathering the topics list, as I believe PNs are. I don't want to do that.

You are ideologically where I was 25 years ago.

1,000 history books, 20 years of govt employment and 15 years of internet later, I am where I am.

So in 25 years you'll be where I am today -- if you're lucky to be alive.

Opinions are like assholes... everybody has one. The person who told me that is now in Public Propaganda Affairs for US Air Farce.

Facts are all that count. Only when you have enough facts can you see the forest for the trees. That's defined as "Intelligence".

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, December 29, 2009 8:12 PM

Quote:
Facts are all that count. Only when you have enough facts can you see the forest for the trees. That's defined as "Intelligence".

Info and facts are only good if you can connect them in a coherent way. "Intelligence" is what got us into an illegal war of occupation in Iraq, remember. :)

For instance, it's a fact that NASA is running out of Plutonium-238, a rare substance that's a by-product of nuclear weapons production. There's enough for about the next eight years' worth of unmanned missions into deep space, then we're done. That's a fact; look it up.

It's also a fact that the U.S. doesn't make this stuff anymore. Hasn't since the 80s, in fact. We've bought from Russia, but they're out now, too, and not making any more. Fact.

If only there were somebody we could get more of this stuff from. And if only there were some way of talking them into selling it to us. Maybe we could make an under-the-table deal with them to let them develop nuclear weapons (since Pu-238 is a byproduct of that process) in exchange for them selling us the Plutonium we need. Oh, and as a side bonus, maybe we'd agree to buy oil from them as well, since they seem to have a whole bunch of it.

Sound like anybody you know?

That last bit isn't a fact; it's pure supposition. But it's supported by some facts.

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 30, 2009 6:58 AM