Keeping track...just an experiment by Niki2

I like your experiment.

I don't generally read the posts are comprised of 50% (or more) profane insults. I'm referring to the kind of posts Kaneman and Whozit and Wulf hurl at you, Niki. (Honestly, I don't know how you put up with it or why you respond to them.) Those posts are so trollish that well, they can't be taken seriously.

I think the experiment will be very revealing about the continuous, snarky personal attacks that happen amidst "civil" discussion. And if I do it, I want to see that too. (I'm still scratching my head on what "derogatory terms" I used against you in the AFAF thread.) I may not agree that it's derogatory, but at least I'll get to see what was interpreted to be derogatory.

So yes, let's keep track.

----
Arrogant and proud of it.

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

Monday, November 15, 2010 10:42 AM

HERO

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Given personal or general slurs...

Since I'm your test case, I reject the premise of your argument. My comment was both personal and general but it was not a slur. I think the technical term is a "poke".

Quote:

Gonna post what can be construed as personally offensive by one or more from either side, and see how it works out.

It is the intent that matters, not the fragile mindset of the "victim". For example, I hate carrots. Rabbits would find this a personal attack on their chosen way of life when in fact it was a simple statement of my opinion about carrots.

Statements can be true, they can be made in jest, they can be both true and made in jest, they can be neither but with no ill intent and still be considered insulting by someone, somewhere.

In order to complete your project you will simply need to repost every comment by every person in every thread since each and every thing said might be considered a personal attack on someone somewhere even if said person was not the intended reader or possibly never read it at all.

You are in effect releasing Political Correctness Aramgeddon on us all and the result will be no speech, expression, or thought.

Quote:

Not going backwards, just starting from today.

Please start with your orgininal comment on this topic since it was a personal attack aimed at me...I expect an apology and for you to admit how stupid this thread is and by extension your complete and utter admission that you are an idiot.*

H

*No insult, slight, stereotype, slur, disparaging sentiment, free thought, or honost opinion was expressed in this comment. Any insult, attack, or negative emotional response perceived from this post are solely the responsibility of the reader and are in fact an insult to the person posting the comment and said person should feel really badly about how weak minded they are.**

**The term "weak minded" is a descriptive expression made for demonstrative purpose only and is not intended as an insult to any person (born or unborn), animal, plant, sentient biotic, hive species, or PirateNews.

"Hero. I have come to respect you." "I am forced to agree with Hero here."- Chrisisall, 2009.
"I would rather not ignore your contributions." Niki2, 2010.

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

Monday, November 15, 2010 10:57 AM

HERO

Oh, and for the sake of clarity please change the title of this thread to 'The Whiny Little Bitch' thread so all the pansy liberals round these parts know what your talking about.*

H

*No insult, slight, stereotype, slur, disparaging sentiment, free thought, or honost opinion was expressed in this comment. Any insult, attack, or negative emotional response perceived from this post are solely the responsibility of the reader and are in fact an insult to the person posting the comment and said person should feel really badly about how weak minded they are.**

**The term "weak minded" is a descriptive expression made for demonstrative purpose only and is not intended as an insult to any person (born or unborn), animal, plant, sentient biotic, hive species, or PirateNews.

"Hero. I have come to respect you." "I am forced to agree with Hero here."- Chrisisall, 2009.
"I would rather not ignore your contributions." Niki2, 2010.

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

Monday, November 15, 2010 11:07 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

"I don't generally read the posts are comprised of 50% (or more) profane insults. I'm referring to the kind of posts Kaneman and Whozit and Wulf hurl at you, Niki. (Honestly, I don't know how you put up with it or why you respond to them.) Those posts are so trollish that well, they can't be taken seriously."

Can I add this one, oh can I, can I?

WHINE WHINE WHINE WHINE

"Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies"

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

Monday, November 15, 2010 11:29 AM

Niki

Forewarned is forearmed. Of course, having been here longer, I've already done this one, some time ago. It did not win me any friends, nor did it influence anyone.

In order to be fair and balanced, you have to be tracked as well.

CTS, I'm not going to be here, so since you seem to like the idea, I appoint you to watch after Niki

Niki

You have to share the exact metrics so that CTS can monitor you in a fair vein. I say this because, no offense, but I would not rank you low on the list of posters of offensive material. I have gone through periods of skipping your posts because they were fairly offensive. Don't worry, I've done this at times with Kane, Rap, Wulf, PN, and even Mike and Signy, oh, and of course, Whozit. I'm sure I'm leaving someone offensive off.

The only one of us who really never posts anything offensive is Chris, though he did create TheRightStuff. Given that, the winner might be Geezer for least offensive, if I go back all the way. RiverDancer and a number of others who aren't here right now never said anything offensive. I think CTS would be on the list, I can't remember any offensive posts. And Frem. I can see some people who weren't me getting offended in some way because he's very frank in his manner, but aside from the occassional "Hey knucklehead" sort of thing, no, I don't think so.

Oh, and Byte had never posted anything offensive that I know of. Magon I don't think so, I disagree with her a lot, but I don't think anything offensive. Or HK either. I think Mal4prez I can't remember, unless there was a teabagger comment in there or something. I think she's pretty mellow as well.

But you see where this is leading? Already I'm breaking down users into who does or doesn't post offensive things, but I don't think that people really judge that much by this. I mean, I don't think who people like or communicate with is largely guided, just that, yeah, you're right, it's a problem in that at some point you stop reading.

Oh, I left off RiverLove and co. I have never stopped reading her posts due to the content, but yes, undoubtedly some people were offended.

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

Monday, November 15, 2010 11:49 AM

CHRISISALL

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:

The only one of us who really never posts anything offensive is Chris, though he did create TheRightStuff.

I am a repeat offender, I repeat, I will offend again...!

The laughing Chrisisall

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

Monday, November 15, 2010 11:52 AM

Niki, in response to the other thread.

2) I must've misread your other post. I thought you were counting individuals. If this is to see which "side" wins, don't bother. Think about it, you're not a neutral party, and so you wouldn't be a credible source for a result, if you were to win. If you were to announce that you had lost, I doubt your side would thank you for it, and I'm not sure they would believe you.

The other thing about this is it's way too tricky. Someone on the left clearly doesn't see the offensive things that they say as offensive, and so wouldn't see them with others.

Someone on the right would be the same. Some people thought I used socialist as an epithet. I may intensely dislike socialism, but I use socialist to directly apply to people who have referred to themselves as socialists.

Evo Morales says he's a National Socialist. Who are we to disagree with him? I disagree with him on the issue of drug trafficking, but I'm not sure how much of an issue Bolivian politics are. I haven't checked his environmental, or human rights record, I guess I just haven't spent a lot of time thinking about or making a judgment about Evo Morales. My opinion of him is really neutral. His political affiliation is his choice, what he ran on, and won on.

But because I disagree with the philosophy of that political position, people may see my posts as biased or offensive if I discuss the matter.

It's like saying "Everyone is biased against nazis" Sure, they are. Probably Auraptor think that no one will be offended if he posts something about Islamic extremists, but that may not be true, someone may be offended.

So, some things are very obvious, like
Republican Motherfucking ASSHOLES
But how about Republidumbies?
That's pretty offensive too.
Teabaggers is unquestionably offensive, but I'm not sure the posters admitted to that, though they must have known.
Posting text next to images of swastikas creates the same intentional association as saying "nazicons" or something

I'm inventing these terms so as not to hit any particular user. But here's one:

People on both sides have posted images and text of what they are attacking relating to feces.

That's probably way up there on the offensive.

Or quotes containing no individually offensive words or images, but just a really offensive post like this one:

Quote:
Dropping a nuclear bomb on Israel would solve the problem

We can all guess who posted it, and I think more than a few times. I may not have gotten the wording exactly right.

But the usual response to an offensive post is not to post that you are offended. It's to leave, or stop reading that person's posts, etc.

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

Tuesday, November 16, 2010 3:02 AM

Niki,

Given the complexity of the experiment, and how certain "subjects" are not volunteering for their comments to be archived in this manner, I have a suggestion. (A good experimenter won't experiment on an involuntary subject, right?)

Just track me. I am the only one who likes the idea. I am the only one who is volunteering for it. Track my offensive comments. You can archive ANYTHING I say that could possibly offend someone. If possible, please note which part was offensive, and the thread from which it came (for context).

Wulf already caught the first one. Good job, Wulf!

----
Arrogant and proud of it.

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

Tuesday, November 16, 2010 4:23 AM

KANEMAN

Who decides what is offensive? Mother Hen? I don't like this at all....

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

Tuesday, November 16, 2010 7:31 AM

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

Excellent! We’re off to a good start, thank you for all the comments.

First caveat: Already it appears to ME that this is being taken too seriously and being viewed as more complex than intended. Just making that note; it's not a big deal, just an experiment.

Okay, to respond:

Happily I will agree with CTTS tracking me, if you’re willing. I’m sure to miss some stuff, and everybody’s in, willing or not. We all quote one another or refer back to posts, especially when it pissed us off, so this is as fair as anything else.

CTTS, as to how I “put up” with the vile hurled at me; exactly what are my options? None, and in some cases, they are housed within a valid comment so that it’s worth reading. Sometimes I just ignore them. When I do read them, it’s easy to dismiss them, given the source...I grew a thick skin, in other words, and they don’t bother me except inasmuch as they affect the flow of the thread, but that’s no biggie. I may not even post many of them, given they’re too numerous, consistent, and stupid, I dunno. We’ll see. Mostly it’s to see what people feel is offensive, which I think might be interesting, for just the reasons you stated.

You brought up an excellent point, CTTS, and it answers Kane’s question as well. Whoever feels something is derogatory, of groups, individuals, etc. If it offends you, put it up. Now, of course, we’ll have to scroll past posts by those who are here for no reason BUT to troll and will put up totally innocuous stuff and say “that offends me”, but that’s the price we pay. The idea is to give examples of the things which the POSTER might not think are offensive at all, but which someone reading them does. For those of you who are actually participating with honest intent, that means things which you truly feel are snarks, not just something like “I don’t like blondes” (which can apply to any group, political party, etc.), but rather a deliberate put-down. Obviously that will vary from person to person, but we can comment on or ignore whatever comes up.

The main idea is to let those of us who care to, see how our words might be taken by others. I don’t expect it to change anything, let’s say it’s just an experiment in self-awareness. Doesn’t matter if anyone wants to review what they said that others found offensive (if they DO, that would be interesting), but perhaps others will find whatever it is illuminating or something.

Quote:
I may not agree that it's derogatory, but at least I'll get to see what was interpreted to be derogatory

Absolutely fair, and for exactly the reason stated.

No, CTTS, I can’t use just you, that’s not a valid experiment. Like I said, almost everyone has quoted someone’s comment and/or responded to a comment angrily; everyone quotes everyone else, so this can be viewed as no different, in my opinion. If it is viewed otherwise, it can be ignored or the person can “leave” as DT suggested.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

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

Tuesday, November 16, 2010 7:32 AM

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

Hero, a “poke” or a “joke” is something which is usually pointed out to be same, with a wink or smilie or something. Because of the limitations of the internet (lacking body language, facial expression, vocal inflection), nobody can tell the by just reading it in some cases. Not to say ANYONE has to put a wink to indicate a poke or something, we’ll just see who feels what about what. And yes, it certainly might depend on the feelings of the reader, whether we consider it “fragile” or not, that’s fair too. Didn’t say we had to agree. Just curious to see how it works out.

Which is what makes it NOT “political correctness armageddon”, it’s up to individuals to decide what they feel is offensive enough to post, and anyone can agree or disagree that it is. And no, I don’t think it will mean posting everything...there actually aren’t that many; some are obvious, some less so, some personally offensive. Anyone can participate, or not, it’s their choice, and read the results, or not. It won’t “change” anyone’s style most likely, but it might be illuminating.

My initial post wasn’t aimed at you, it was an illustration, nothing more. I can see this is going to be interesting, if not fun, given the differing opinions, personalities, etc. If anyone takes offense at a comment of theirs being posted, they’re free to disagree.

Quote:
Statements can be true, they can be made in jest, they can be both true and made in jest, they can be neither but with no ill intent and still be considered insulting by someone, somewhere.

Absolutely valid, that’s part of the purpose. But I think we’ll find that most people don’t find most comments personally offensive or offensive to their political ideology; it’s about things that REALLY offend, not about “carrots” or suchlike. That’s the intent anyway; if people want to expose the fragility of their feelings, that’s okay too, but nobody’s under any onus to change anything because of that.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

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

Tuesday, November 16, 2010 7:33 AM

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

DT, I find it interesting you tried this experiment before. I had no intention of winning friends or changing anyone, I just think it’s an interesting experiment, and some of us might learn something from it—whatever anyone takes away is fair. And of COURSE I want to be included, I wouldn’t suggest it otherwise. That’s part of my reason for doing it; I’ve been trying NOT to be offensive (I keep slipping and have to go back to square one, which shows I can still be triggered); that I don’t succeed is interesting to me and I’ll gain better understanding by seeing what I post that offends others. So in that way it’s purely a personal experiment, but if anyone else is interested, that’s cool too.

I agree with your list of least offensive, except that some of the things Geezer has directed at me seemed offensive in the past. Personally, I would put Anthony at he head of the list, with RiverDancer a close second. I haven’t taken note beyond those two, so I can’t speak to your list, but it’s not about who’s “most” or “least” offensive, it’s more general than that. Just an experiment, nothing more.

No, it’s not about which “side” “wins”—there is no intended “winner” anyway. No, it’s not about parties. It’s MOSTLY about the concept that what we post may seem innocuous to us, but may not be so to the other person. Some stuff is obvious, but as she said, CTTS can’t see what she wrote that I found derogatory in that other thread, so there’s an example. But beyond that, what STARTED it rolling around my brain was repeated comments about how vicious liberals are, when what I read is far more consistently ugly by conservatives. When I thought about it, that made me wonder if what we write (“we” being generalized) comes across more offensive than intended, whether the above is a misconception, and, well, just curiosity. I don’t intend it to generalize to any “side”, but that’s where it started and I’m curious to see why some people feel we are so nasty; I know my perspective is subjective, so I’m curious.

Quote:
Someone on the left clearly doesn't see the offensive things that they say as offensive, and so wouldn't see them with others.

You can easily take “on the left” out; it applies to everyone, and that’s the point. Ah, I see you said that right after; yes, that’s the point. I would disagree that

Quote:
I use socialist to directly apply to people who have referred to themselves as socialists

That may be my subjective reading, or carried over from someone else’s remarks, but to I believe I’ve seen you use it other than as you say. That’s the sort of thing I’m curious about.

Quote:
Republican Motherfucking ASSHOLES
But how about Republidumbies?
That's pretty offensive too.
Teabaggers is unquestionably offensive, but I'm not sure the posters admitted to that, though they must have known.
Posting text next to images of swastikas creates the same intentional association as saying "nazicons" or something

Those are the more obvious kinds of things to which I’m referring. I realized shortly ago that one of the reasons you find “teabaggers” so offensive is that you feel closely tied to the Libertarian ideology and the original Tea Party concepts, so it hits you personally. I used to use derogatory terms, but have tried for some time not to use Dumbya, teabagger, etc., and I view “libtard” and “libturd” as offensive. Of COURSE it’s subjective, as I said before. Also the feces thing.

Quote:
But the usual response to an offensive post is not to post that you are offended. It's to leave, or stop reading that person's posts, etc.

You’re taking it too seriously. For one thing, nobody should have to “leave” or stop reading someone’s posts just because something offensive was said about/to them. It happens, that’s why anyone in RWED needs to have at least somewhat of a thick skin, but I’m just interested in the concept.

Nobody has to participate, as I said, it’s just an experiment. Anyone can attribute any motive to my suggesting it which they want, and snark at me or ignore the thread. It's no biggie, to me, just an interesting concept.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

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

Tuesday, November 16, 2010 7:53 AM

I've been thinking about this.

I look at stuff I find offensive and most of the time, it appears to be on purpose. When someone says, "CTS is pathetic..." they know they are at least mildly offensive--they just believe that it's true, so why can't they say it? If I take offense at the truth, that is my own damn fault, right?

As Sig says, she snarks and condescends on purpose, knowing exactly what she is doing. So what? If I post it as offensive, what will that show her? Nothing.

If you post things Hero says is offensive, he'll just say you're too sensitive and shrug it off. It will show him nothing.

After thinking about it, I think a collection of all the snarks will just inflame everyone more.

I think the experiment is only useful for people like me, who want to learn more about how things I say get interpreted differently than how I intended. Maybe that is better done on a case by case basis.

I can do the same for you. And if anyone else wants to join in, they can. But I don't really feel comfortable pointing out snarks in those who have no interest in "self-awareness" of this type, if you will.

For example, we can start with your pasting the "derogatory terms" I didn't see. Not for me to argue about, but for me to see how it became perceived as derogatory. (I'm still very curious about that.)

----
Arrogant and proud of it.

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

Tuesday, November 16, 2010 8:17 AM

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

CTTS: Will check the thread you're curious about and try to find what you asked.

I know each person will take this differently, as is already obvious. It's my concept and I take resposibility for it. I guess I would say that, given the extremly offensive (I think those other than the ones who have it in for me would find them so) threads that have been started to and about me makes it fair game. I've posted a couple of those threads myself; the one about Kane I felt was perfectly justified as I was quoting his own words in order to make the point that he's racist, which he insists he's not. Fair example, to me, in that it's not something made up deliberately just to attack someone...others will view it otherwise.

It's not to "change" anything. If you want my reasons as best I can figure them, they are:

1) to illustrate just how nasty it gets down here;

2) like you, to learn how some of what I post is viewed as a direct attack on someone; and

3) for anyone else who is interested.

For example, one could say "what CTTS wrote is pathetic", which is an opinion--so is "CTTS is pathetic", but that's more of an attack, in my view. That's fair game; but it's all in HOW attacking or offensive you personally feel it was.

That's about it; it's not intended as a vendetta, nor that people put up every little thing, nor is it particularly serious. I just found the concept interesting and wanted to see where it went.

Thus far it's been very interesting in that it's shown me how people view such a concept. I think some are taking it too seriously, but again, it's wide open and anyone's entitled to their opinion, whatever it is however they feel about it. Or not.

I don't expect it to change anything, as I said, and I doubt it will make much of anyone think twice about what they write, but if anyone learns anything, it's worthwhile; if anyone finds they agree that something posted is offensive or attacking, it might be of interest to them if they felt the same way and thought they were alone in their feelings. It can just spark all kinds of interesting discussion, or none. We'll see.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

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

Tuesday, November 16, 2010 8:43 AM

Fair enough.

Re the "derogatory" issue, this is what you said:

Quote:
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=18&t=46131

And, as an aside, when it comes to the terms RWA and AF, I never thought you were attacking me personally, I'm just frustrated that you dismiss these concepts out of hand and rely on your opinion that they are biased, ergo totally invalid. And you didn't "imply" that my assertions were not objective, when it came to RWA, you said it straight out, IN PRETTY DERROGATORY TERMS (sic, emphasis mine)...not just about my assertions, but to the point of dismissing Altemeyer completely in a distinctly negative way. You may not agree with him--obviously you don't--but that doesn't automatically mean his theories are bullshit; it's your opinion, that's all.

Thanks in advance for clarifying.

----
Arrogant and proud of it.

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

Tuesday, November 16, 2010 8:55 AM

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

Whew. Read through that entire thread you referenced; that took a bit. But it was a fair question, so I did it. Was illuminating. First and foremost: I think you’re right in that you were picked on when you actually tried to be logical and rational and didn’t actually deride anyone. What I see is are passionate feelings on one side and offense taken by the belief that you were dismissing what was written to you. And, in honesty, I can’t see how that opinion was arrived at, as your posts were reasonable. There’s more at work than your “style” or words, but I can’t put my finger on it.

It MAY be the point about lack of empathy. The discussion was about something which brings up emotion (climate change) and you dealt with it objectively. I THINK (subjectively) people were looking for some chink, some recognition on your part that climate change might exist and be worth worrying about. You didn’t say specifically that you didn’t believe in it, you said “agnostic”...by the time you said that, tho’, I for one was thoroughly convinced you believed everything about climate change was bunk, so by then it’s quite possible others did and missed your “agnostic”.

Okay, as to what offended me personally...and I would say it was because it felt judgmental and dismissive.

Quote:
It is easy to come up with a label for people we perceive as authoritarian or obedient

I don’t think it’s “easy” at all, in fact I find it quite difficult, and given the author spent a lot of time and ran a number of experiments (whether you give them weight or not) to come to his conclusions. That felt dismissive.

Quote:
I am NOT saying the belief and trust is not warranted. I am saying simply that we all have this belief and trust from certain authorities and systems and not others.

That felt like a put-down, as if saying that my beliefs came from certain authorities, period, with which I disagree. I know I have a problem with people saying “all”, so that’s probably subjective on my part.

Quote:
I also see it in a good number of liberals here in RWED, as extremely as you see it in as Rap and Wulf, where they never apologize or admit error. They go on similar vicious personal attacks. The only difference I see? The liberals appear to be better educated and well spoken; they are not as vulgar and are more sophisticated in their ad hominems. But the AFAF part? Yeah, all there.

This one is a pet peeve. One reason I started this thread. I don’t see more than a couple of liberals never apologizing or admitting errors, or going on “similar vicious personal attacks”. I don’t see ANYTHING similar from the left to the kind of filth hurled from the right, and I see only a few from the left, whereas we have five or more on the right.

I also don’t see the AFAF part equally...as above, not nearly as aggressively, not nearly as close-mindedly, and nothing like as unwilling to EVER accept ANYTHING negative about anyone or anything on their side. We freely admit we’re not pleased with Obama or the lack of balls of the Dems; what I see from the right is a persistent, dogmatic (RWA symptom) insistence that NOBODY on their “side” could ever do anything wrong.

So I took that one personally and it pissed me off. Those are the things that gave me the impression I got, and I think somehow others got their impressions and they colored how they addressed you. I don’t think you’re an arrogant ass; perhaps you state things with such certainty that it feels judgmental to others or something, I really can’t put my finger on it. But DEFINITELY, in that thread, you received attacks and personal insults while not deliberately offering anything yourself. It was an interesting thread to read, and I dunno how to figure out why you were viewed the way you were, but I bet it’s not the only time.

I know the same is true of me; I think I’m being fair and reasonable, then get told I’m being hateful or insulting, or that I think I know it all. If you figure it out, please share; if I figure it out, I’ll let you know, ‘cuz I think we’re both experiencing somewhat of the same thing, somehow causing emotions in others that we never intended. It's weird.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

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

Tuesday, November 16, 2010 9:04 AM

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

Aha...just caught your response. Yes, definitely I got the feeling that you dismissed Altemeyer's theories out of hand, and it felt like a bias. I'm not sure why, on that point...it MAY be that you aren't willing to invest in anything, not climate change, not RWA, and take both a more objective and state it in a way that SEEMS to leave no room for consideration of the opposing view. I know with climate change, you clarified that you don't believe OR disbelieve it exists, but when it came to Altemeyer's views, you pretty much dismissed them out of hand, saying "everyone" has those traits. Everyone does, and Altemeyer says that all through his book, it's those who have them to extremes he was posting about and with which I agree.

You dissed his experiments also a while back I believe (tho' that could easily have been someone else and me transferring); I don't think they were so easily dismissable and I think I'd like to know in what specific way you dismiss them.

I know that part of my reaction is because I was so impressed with his theories, it shocked me when I first read it, and it answered so much of what I've observed and experienced from the right. I sincerely don't believe the same is equally true from the left, but would like to see something that posited, with experiments, that it is true.

So what I was expressing was more "frustration" than feeling offended, that I know. Your statements seemed biased and there was no way you seemed willing to even consider they might be true.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

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

Tuesday, November 16, 2010 9:10 AM

"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:
Teabaggers is unquestionably offensive, but I'm not sure the posters admitted to that, though they must have known.

Actually, I know teabaggers find it offensive. And I don't really give a flying fuck. How many times have the teabaggers and the Repugnicans been told that it's the DemocratIC party, not "the democrat party"? Still, they insist on getting it wrong, because they think it's cute. And they've been doing it for years. So fuck 'em. I'll show them exactly the same respect they show me, which is none.

I'll continue to refer to them as teabaggers. Or by the new name I've invented to show the merger of the two groups: TeaBaglicans.

Be offended. Learn how to say my party's name correctly, and then come talk to me about it, and you might get somewhere.

The modern definition of "socialist" is anyone who's winning an argument against a tea-bagger.

AURaptor's Greatest Hits:

Friday, September 24, 2010
I hate Obama's America. You're damn right about that.

Friday, May 28, 2010 - 18:26 To President Obama:
Mr. President, you're a god damn, mother fucking liar.
Fuck you, you cock sucking community activist piece of shit.
... go fuck yourself, Mr. President.

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

Tuesday, November 16, 2010 9:24 AM

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

Yes, Mike, a valid point...do a degree. You're free to be as objectionable as you wish, everyone here is and many are. The only complaint I have about it is that it makes you as bad as them, AND that you use it in responding to anyone, even those who have never used the various silly terms to you or about Democrats.

It in no way contributes to communication, in fact it makes honest communication more difficult. I know you do it for fun and that's your right, just as the verbal masturbation of some is their right; doesn't MAKE it right, on either person's part.

Sure, if you're talking to someone who does it, it's fair in its way, but it only ends up triggering THEM to get nastier, so nothing's gained except offending anyone and everyone who is a Tea Partier, whether they've dissed ever you or the Democrats, and helping the discussion get sidetracked into those back-and-forths you engage in most of the time.

My point is that we only address one another, here on FFF, so to saying things deliberately to one another which are offensive when no offense was intended by the original poster is wrong, in my opinion. JMHO. We're not talking to the politicians, we're talking to one another.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

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

Tuesday, November 16, 2010 11:27 AM

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

Thus far today:

Whozit (tho’ it’s not really necessary to post his, as virtually ALL of his are offensive and probably intended as such): Janet would love to be frisked by a "Bull Dike" named Spike that kick starts her vibrator.

Raptor: would Barry want his girls put in that situation? Groped or scanned, for some TSA agent's cheap thrill. (That offends me; I wasn’t offended by the original question)

I’m not posting Chris’ stuff, mostly because I know he’s teasing, so it doesn’t offend me. I’m also not posting the obscenities in CTTS’ reply, as it makes a point, so doesn’t offend me personally.

“Sheeple”...I saw it used by DT just now, but it offends me every time I see it, despite the fact that once or twice I’ve used it myself.

Wulf: Good grief, you are as arrogant as Obama.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

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

Tuesday, November 16, 2010 12:18 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Whew. Read through that entire thread you referenced; that took a bit. But it was a fair question, so I did it.

Wow. That's dedication. Thank you.

Quote:
What I see is are passionate feelings on one side and offense taken by the belief that you were dismissing what was written to you.

Yes, HK drove that point home quite well, which I never quite saw that way before: that my hmmmm, shall we say "passive aggressiveness" (for lack of a better term) is as infuriating and as insulting as overt snarkiness or even overt invectives.

Quote:
There’s more at work than your “style” or words, but I can’t put my finger on it.

As I told Chris, I got talent for pissing people off. Magic, "X" factor-level talent.

Seriously though, I'll address this below.

Quote:
Okay, as to what offended me personally...and I would say it was because it felt judgmental and dismissive.

Fair enough. It is funny, cause I thought I was trying to be positive, bringing us all into the same group instead of "us" vs. "them." At least, that was my intent.

Quote:
I don’t see ANYTHING similar from the left to the kind of filth hurled from the right, and I see only a few from the left, whereas we have five or more on the right.

I think we may have cleared this one up already. I was comparing right snarkiness to left snarkiness. I routinely ignore the "trollish" posts, so I didn't count them at all. I assumed that no one else took them seriously either because in my view, they were not genuine representations of "right ideology." (That is, you can represent "right ideology" without trollishness.) Obviously, I was wrong about that assumption.

Quote:
I don’t think you’re an arrogant ass;

That is kind of you to say. But the thing I learned from all this is that I AM an arrogant ass, and repressing it or denying it just makes it come out in passive aggressive ways. It's like people can feel the "vibes" of my arrogance, whether I say it or not. So there's no use hiding it. In fact, I am hoping that being openly arrogant will help ease the confusion between what people FEEL I am saying (but can't put their finger on because I never technically said it) and what I SEE myself saying. Maybe my words will start to become more congruent with their feelings.

Quote:
If you figure it out, please share; if I figure it out, I’ll let you know,‘cuz I think we’re both experiencing somewhat of the same thing, somehow causing emotions in others that we never intended. It's weird.

Sounds like a good deal.

----
Arrogant and proud of it.

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

Tuesday, November 16, 2010 12:53 PM

One more thing. I was thinking about my argument with Magon about thanking Kaneman. At the time, I was feeling a bit raw from the cumulative effect of RWED nastiness. No matter how thick your skin is, sometimes, in weaker moments, it gets under your skin.

So here I was, feeling raw and tender, and I notice that he's never heaped any nastiness on me. I dunno, I just felt like thanking him.

It is sort of like a mom at her son's funeral, and across the street is the Westboro Baptist Church, protesting some other son's funeral. She bumps into one of them and say, "Hey, for what it is worth, thanks for not protesting at mine." It's a boorish and insensitive thing to say, but what she really means is, "Thanks for not heaping this pain on me too, because I can't take anymore pain today."

Now Magon could have just pointed out that what I said was boorish and insensitive. And I would have agreed. But she, from MY perspective, jumps on me with the assumption that of course, saying "Thank you" means "I think Kaneman is all right."

At that point, I could have crumpled into a crying heap, but I decided to hold my ground. Sometimes, "Thank you" just means "Thank you." And if WBC doesn't protest me, I don't see a moral problem with saying, "Thanks for not protesting me." It's appallingly insensitive, but it's not immoral. If no one ever gives them any positive reinforcement for NOT acting repulsively, how are they ever going to get an inkling of the right way to behave?

So I disagree with Magon that thanking Kaneman carries the same moral stature as passively enabling Nazis.

But for the record, I don't condone Kaneman's vulgarity. I'd rather just ignore him when he acts like that. I tend to do that with everyone else too, interact when they are decent and ignore them when they are not.

----
Arrogant and proud of it.

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

Tuesday, November 16, 2010 1:53 PM

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

Yes, people took your words to mean you condoned how Kane behaves. It's not surprising; he is SO over the top that for anyone sensible to say anything nice to him seems like they must not mind what he posts. But I understand and I'm glad you clarified it.

I understand what you meant now by thanking Kane. I still disagree; nothing you or anyone will EVER say will change Kane in any way, I would bet money on that, and

Quote:
If no one ever gives them any positive reinforcement for NOT acting repulsively, how are they ever going to get an inkling of the right way to behave?

I think they know how to behave; they choose not to, so it's a waste of effort.

I'm glad you condemn his unconscionable behavior (my choice of words, not yours). Thank you for clearing that up.

I'm sorry if things you read here made you feel like that; this is a dangerous place unless you have the skin of a rhino. Luckily I've managed to grow one, but yes, absolutely

Quote:
No matter how thick your skin is, sometimes, in weaker moments, it gets under your skin.

Mine too--although not in the same way. I get pissed now and again, partly the cumulative thing you mentioned, partly just at how disgusting and inhuman it is.

But "they" can't hurt me...ironically, the people I respect and care about CAN, but even then only slightly. It's too dangerous to leave oneself open to friend or foe on the internet unless I've known them a long, long time and trust them a bit. Jim says I'm nuts to stay here, after a few of the things I've told him were written to me, but there are more people here who it's worth knowing than there are useless trolls, so I stay. I may leave at any time, but it won't be because our trolls hurt me or scare me off.

Do take care of yourself. That IS what's the most important thing.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

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

Tuesday, November 16, 2010 1:53 PM

Quote:
That is kind of you to say. But the thing I learned from all this is that I AM an arrogant ass, and repressing it or denying it just makes it come out in passive aggressive ways. It's like people can feel the "vibes" of my arrogance, whether I say it or not. So there's no use hiding it. In fact, I am hoping that being openly arrogant will help ease the confusion between what people FEEL I am saying (but can't put their finger on because I never technically said it) and what I SEE myself saying. Maybe my words will start to become more congruent with their feelings.

That's refreshing. It's also why I say it right up front: I'm an asshole. I'm a bastard, and a fucker. I'm "The Angriest Man on the Internet™". I'm not shy about it. As Frank Lloyd Wright said, "I prefer honest arrogance to hypocritical humility."

The modern definition of "socialist" is anyone who's winning an argument against a tea-bagger.

AURaptor's Greatest Hits:

Friday, September 24, 2010
I hate Obama's America. You're damn right about that.

Friday, May 28, 2010 - 18:26 To President Obama:
Mr. President, you're a god damn, mother fucking liar.
Fuck you, you cock sucking community activist piece of shit.
... go fuck yourself, Mr. President.

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

Tuesday, November 16, 2010 1:59 PM

Quote:
Now Magon could have just pointed out that what I said was boorish and insensitive. And I would have agreed. But she, from MY perspective, jumps on me with the assumption that of course, saying "Thank you" means "I think Kaneman is all right."

I got that. I mean, I knew where you were coming from. Hell, as one of KKKaney's favorite targets, I have no problem with you thanking him for not being a total worthless fucktard towards you. It in no way means you endorse his fucktardishness.

To say it does is like saying that someone being glad THEY survived a massacre is the same as them saying they're glad everyone else got killed. They aren't glad for the other peoples' suffering - they're glad for their LACK of same.

The modern definition of "socialist" is anyone who's winning an argument against a tea-bagger.

AURaptor's Greatest Hits:

Friday, September 24, 2010
I hate Obama's America. You're damn right about that.

Friday, May 28, 2010 - 18:26 To President Obama:
Mr. President, you're a god damn, mother fucking liar.
Fuck you, you cock sucking community activist piece of shit.
... go fuck yourself, Mr. President.

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

Tuesday, November 16, 2010 2:03 PM

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

I find the following offensive; given the source, it's no less than I would expect and happens daily, AND is based in such unreality and idiocy I shouldn't be offended by it, but I am nonetheless:

Wulf: Letting the fringe left determine the level of discourse in our home.....Not again, ya'll national socialists DO NOT get to determine the speech of free people.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

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

Tuesday, November 16, 2010 2:20 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
As Frank Lloyd Wright said, "I prefer honest arrogance to hypocritical humility."

That's my new motto. Very cool. :)

----
Arrogant and proud of it.

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

Tuesday, November 16, 2010 2:21 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
I may leave at any time, but it won't be because our trolls hurt me or scare me off.

After what you've been through, I can't imagine anyone thinking that! LOL

----
Arrogant and proud of it.

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

Tuesday, November 16, 2010 8:27 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
I find the following offensive; given the source, it's no less than I would expect and happens daily, AND is based in such unreality and idiocy I shouldn't be offended by it, but I am nonetheless:

Wulf: Letting the fringe left determine the level of discourse in our home.....Not again, ya'll national socialists DO NOT get to determine the speech of free people.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

As a former hillbilly of Kentucky, I find the incorrect use of Y'all offensive.

Also, it's an obvious Godwin.

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

Wednesday, November 17, 2010 3:16 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
I find the following offensive; given the source, it's no less than I would expect and happens daily, AND is based in such unreality and idiocy I shouldn't be offended by it, but I am nonetheless:

Wulf: Letting the fringe left determine the level of discourse in our home.....Not again, ya'll national socialists DO NOT get to determine the speech of free people.

As a former hillbilly of Kentucky, I find the incorrect use of Y'all offensive.

Also, it's an obvious Godwin.

Then aim your ire at Wulfie - it was his quote. And I can pretty safely assure you that it was unintentional on Wulfie's part. He has no idea at all how, when, or where to use the apostrophe. Look at all of his contractions. "Its"; "dont"; "lets", etc. What on Earth would lead one to believe that he could get a contraction of "you all" right?

By the way, it's funny that nobody seems to find offensive Wulfie's claim that "ya'll national socialists DO NOT get to determine the speech of free people". Was I the only one who saw the hypocrisy in that claim? YOU don't get to determine the speech of free people, *I* DO!"

See, with Wulfie, it's never been about the RIGHT of free speech - only about who DETERMINES that "right" and controls it. You have the right to free speech in Wulfie's world - as long as you agree with everything he says.

The modern definition of "socialist" is anyone who's winning an argument against a tea-bagger.

AURaptor's Greatest Hits:

Friday, September 24, 2010
I hate Obama's America. You're damn right about that.

Friday, May 28, 2010 - 18:26 To President Obama:
Mr. President, you're a god damn, mother fucking liar.
Fuck you, you cock sucking community activist piece of shit.
... go fuck yourself, Mr. President.

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

Wednesday, November 17, 2010 3:34 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
See, with Wulfie, it's never been about the RIGHT of free speech - only about who DETERMINES that "right" and controls it. You have the right to free speech in Wulfie's world - as long as you agree with everything he says.

I read it differently. I think he was saying that 1) socialists set the standard for political correctness, 2) political correctness is oppressive for free speech, 3) this thread is yet another example of defining and singling out politically incorrect speech, and 4) socialists should not try to impede free speech via political correctness.

I'm not saying I agree with him. But that's the way I interpreted what he was saying, for what it's worth.

----
Arrogant and proud of it.

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

Wednesday, November 17, 2010 4:49 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Seems rather silly, imo.

Quote:
that what is viewed by some (maybe even the poster) as harmless can be TAKEN as nasty, in comparison to what is actually deliberately nasty

Seems no matter what I ( or some others ) post, it'll be deliberately contorted into misrepresented as a means to dismiss and attack what ever point which is being made.

Same ol same ol....

If I say " puppies are cute " , it'll be twisted into all manner of absurd meaning, lambasted as being 'code ' for some more sinister , racial comment, and ..well, there you have it.

I disapprove of this idea.

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

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

Wednesday, November 17, 2010 4:49 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

"I read it differently. I think he was saying that 1) socialists set the standard for political correctness, 2) political correctness is oppressive for free speech, 3) this thread is yet another example of defining and singling out politically incorrect speech, and 4) socialists should not try to impede free speech via political correctness.

I'm not saying I agree with him. But that's the way I interpreted what he was saying, for what it's worth."

You got the intention of my post absolutly correct.

10 points for you.

"Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies"

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

Wednesday, November 17, 2010 5:11 AM

Mike,

That ire *was* aimed at Wulfie. I thought it was obvious. Sorry.

As for the content of wulfie's oxymoron, I was too much on [ignore]

Oh, and your signature is still calling me a cocksucker. That's kind of ironic considering that in the same red text, you're chastising Rap for calling someone a cocksucker. You oxymoron.

Niki,

That ire was aimed at Wulfie, not you

Wulf,

Sorry, just y'all, it's a contraction of you all, not of yahweh's will. If you say ya'll, it looks like you're saying "you will" but more, it makes you look fucking ignorant man.

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

Wednesday, November 17, 2010 7:44 AM

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

DT, I understood who you were addressing. I hear Kentucky is GORGEOUS...how long did you live there? Were you born there? Just curious.

I took Wulf’s remarks the same way you did, CTTS, but I think the remark is stupid. Given:

a) Wulf personally attacks people who say things he doesn’t like, to the point of actually telling them to shut up;
b) This thread is nothing about “political correctness”, it’s just an experiment, it isn’t expected to change how anyone posts, except if they CHOOSE to;
c) It couldn’t force change in how anyone posts anyway, as nobody here has any power over anyone else’s free speech (something it appears Wulf never grasped); and
d) Just to say; communication is enhanced by respect for others, hatred and deliberate offensiveness is contrary to communication. It’s also more mature, but that’s just JMHO

Quote:
it'll be deliberately contorted into misrepresented as a means to dismiss and attack what ever point which is being made

Raptor, any time you communicate with decency and make what I consider a valid point, I attempt to respond in kind. I will make a better effort not to “carry forward” resentment for past remarks.

Quote:
If I say " puppies are cute " , it'll be twisted into all manner of absurd meaning, lambasted as being 'code ' for some more sinister , racial comment

That, however, is totally false and an absurd example. One might also characterize that as "whining", I would say, given the text.

DT: How do you figure Mike’s signature is calling you a cocksucker? I don’t get that; he’s quoting Raptor calling the President a cocksucker. If it offends you, put it up if you wish, but it’s obviously not aimed at YOU...?

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

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

Wednesday, November 17, 2010 9:41 AM

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

I suppose I should ignore Kane, as so many of his posts are absurd, obscene, nasty and visigothic, and it doesn't really do any good to poin them out. However, today:

Quote:
Kwicko try to keep your cock in your pants. Leave it to you to get all hot and bothered looking at an old black dinosaur....You gays are hilarious. Pathetic really.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

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

Wednesday, November 17, 2010 9:54 AM

KANEMAN

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
I suppose I should ignore Kane, as so many of his posts are absurd, obscene, nasty and visigothic, and it doesn't really do any good to poin them out. However, today:
Quote:
Kwicko try to keep your cock in your pants. Leave it to you to get all hot and bothered looking at an old black dinosaur....You gays are hilarious. Pathetic really.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

That was on topic...sorry, you fail to see that.

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

Wednesday, November 17, 2010 11:01 AM

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

Story (in response to Wulf’s “Just laughing at the blatant ignance shown...“): You should embrace the drunk thing, Wulf. It would explain some of the stupid shit you spout.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

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

Wednesday, November 17, 2010 11:11 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:

Raptor, any time you communicate with decency and make what I consider a valid point, I attempt to respond in kind. I will make a better effort not to “carry forward” resentment for past remarks.

Fair enough. Though I don't hold you as a primarily guilty of this reoccurring theme. I'll leave it at that.

Quote:

Quote:
If I say " puppies are cute " , it'll be twisted into all manner of absurd meaning, lambasted as being 'code ' for some more sinister , racial comment
That, however, is totally false and an absurd example. One might also characterize that as "whining", I would say, given the text.

Of course, I use that as an extreme example, but the point is made. If I say " they " and I'm talking about tax payers, some will intentionally read into something that I'm not meaning, and extrapolate from there. It's been done quite often, to me and others, and I'm thoroughly tired of it.

( And yes, that some here insist on being uncivil trolls and toss about all manner of derogatory and racist slurs, almost to cartoonish extent, doesn't help move the discussion forward - at all )

And hell yes, I'll whine, bitch, and defend myself all day long, and twice on sunday when ever anyone accuses me of being a racist. Bank on it.

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

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

Wednesday, November 17, 2010 11:41 AM

Niki

Thanks for illustrating my point perfectly. Mike's signature contains the word teabagger to apply to the reform movement. Actually, ball sucker would be more accurate.

My parents moved up here before I was born but I went back to live there a couple years during the 80s. Nice place.

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

Wednesday, November 17, 2010 12:27 PM

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

Raptor, if you had used the example you just DID about misunderstanding what you wrote, I'd have agreed with you 100% and it would have furthered the conversation; the point I was trying to make. As to

Quote:
And yes, that some here insist on being uncivil trolls and toss about all manner of derogatory and racist slurs, almost to cartoonish extent, doesn't help move the discussion forward - at all

You've GOT to admit that's humorous, coming from you! If you've changed tactics recently and I've missed it, that's one thing, but up until now, virtually everything I've seen from you has been exactly what you described! Just considering some of the things you've called ME makes the statement particularly ironic.

As to

Quote:
Mike's signature contains the word teabagger to apply to the reform movement

I disagree. The sentence, first of all, is as far as I can tell a turn-around of someone else’s signature. Second, nowhere does it state that teabagger refers to the reform movement; you’re free to take it that way and feel personally offended, but I don’t think that’s what he was even implying. Today’s tea party is one thing; the original reform movement quite another. I won’t keep repeating that I dislike the use of the teabagger term, but if you were approaching this honestly, you’d recognize that he’s taking their original name for themselves and turning it against them. His prerogative, and they DID originally call themselves that, so while there’s something to be said for his point, I still hate the term.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

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

Wednesday, November 17, 2010 12:32 PM

MAL4PREZ

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Thanks for illustrating my point perfectly. Mike's signature contains the word teabagger to apply to the reform movement. Actually, ball sucker would be more accurate.

And the use of "teabagger" is soooo much more offensive then this:

"Much unlike the past... this dried up hag has tried to shift us to socialism..

So yea, she deserves all she gets. Arrows, bullets... whatever.

You want to follow the Hitler-light group... thats on you."

http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=18&t=46297

So when's the last time someone talked to you like this DreamTrove? Can you show me the post when a left-winger called Ron Paul "a dried up man-hag" who deserves "arrows, bullets... whatever" and called your ideology "Hitler-light". No, not a glancing comparison of specific behaviors to behaviors in Germany in the 30's, but a direct name-call, as in: "Your Tea-Party is Hitler-light."

Which is the point of Niki's experiment. Language like that is pretty much standard fare from many right-wing posters here, even if other right-wingers don't notice it.

I have an experiment of my own in mind. Someday I'll try it. But I won't announce it first.

-----------------------------------------------
hmm-burble-blah, blah-blah-blah, take a left

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

Wednesday, November 17, 2010 12:50 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:

Raptor, if you had used the example you just DID about misunderstanding what you wrote, I'd have agreed with you 100% and it would have furthered the conversation; the point I was trying to make. As to
Quote:
And yes, that some here insist on being uncivil trolls and toss about all manner of derogatory and racist slurs, almost to cartoonish extent, doesn't help move the discussion forward - at all
You've GOT to admit that's humorous, coming from you! If you've changed tactics recently and I've missed it, that's one thing, but up until now, virtually everything I've seen from you has been exactly what you described! Just considering some of the things you've called ME makes the statement particularly ironic.

Niki, you clearly have me confused with some others on here.

I don't use racial slurs. And I'm not in the habit of routinely tossing around derogatory insults. Not saying 'never, but it's rare that I sink to full blown vulgarity.

Virtually everything you've seen from me ? I think you have a problem w/ your eyes, ma'am. Or your brain. The sense of proportion on your part is extremely exaggerated.

" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

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

Wednesday, November 17, 2010 12:54 PM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Not a right-winger here... Mal4Prez...

Just a free mind.

But you got some issue with what I say, bring it.

"Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies"

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

Wednesday, November 17, 2010 1:15 PM

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

I believe you are forgetting the signature I used for a short time:

“Mr. President--you're a god damn, mother fucking liar. Fuck you, you cock sucking community activist piece of shit.... oh, go fuck yourself, Mr. President” ”Anthony--go fuck yourself...make no mistake. I want you to go fuck yourself long and hard” ”Frem--You miserable piece of shit””Kwicko--You're the putrid slime which oozes between troll's toes, you're so low.” ...sayeth Raptor

Those were quotes FROM YOU, so saying you don't use vulgarity is wrong. Yes, you can argue you said "it's rare", but the fact is, you have. The derogatory insults have come my way frequently--as I said, if you've changed, I might not have noticed it. I'll pay attention. But it doesn't take obscenity to be insulting, and you've insulted me as far back as I can remember, quite deliberately.

Why exactly do you think, if you've not behaved as I sid, numerous people add your name when remarking about the ugliness of your snarks at me, listing you along with Kane, Whozit, etc? Your name is always there, which wouldn't happen if you hadn't caused it to happen.

Either you don't recognize what you write, or you're trying to deny it now. Either way, you're wrong.

From the thread about the experiment,

Raptor: 11/11/2010: Go back to molesting prairie dogs.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=18&t=46161

Raptor, 11/2/2010: Now, take your seat, in the back,sit down, and shut the HELL UP!
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=18&t=46053

Just a couple of examples. No bad sense of proportion, no exaggeration.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

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

Wednesday, November 17, 2010 1:19 PM

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

Missed this one. Saw the first time it was used, but yes, THIS offends me:"So yea, she deserves all she gets. Arrows, bullets... whatever.

You want to follow the Hitler-light group... thats on you."

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

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

Wednesday, November 17, 2010 1:33 PM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

It actually offends you?

Whoah...

Hope for you yet Niki..

But you follow in the footsteps of people like Pelosi and Obama.. (trying to turn our home into some National Socialist paradise) you get what comes to you.

You might want to consider the path you walk.

"Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies"

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

Wednesday, November 17, 2010 1:37 PM

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

From Mike: ...asked if it was your cowardice or your craziness that kept you from serving your country. (By the way, you never did answer that question - which one was it?)

I find that offensive.

Wulf, you'll have something to say to me when/if you crawl out of your hole of fantasy. You're remark about "actually offends" is pathetic--any reasonable human being would be offended by the suggestion of someone's death.

The "Socialist" thing has gotten SO damned old, I wish you'd get some new material or something. You just spout the same old things time after time, make the same ridiculous claims, the same immature condescending remarks, regurgitate the same tired buzz words; it's a shame.

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

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

Wednesday, November 17, 2010 2:04 PM