|
|
Post by Hordini on Oct 18, 2023 17:57:54 GMT -5
You're right. And you still can't figure out how to do it, can you? Are you incapable, unwilling, or both? I think you missed my point. That seems to be a common excuse you use to avoid answering a direct question. |
|
|
|
Post by Emblematic Wolfblade on Oct 18, 2023 17:59:17 GMT -5
your response was to create a megathread of his posts to dunk on him. No, my first response was to spend months trying to debunk or point out flaws in his points. It also wasn't a good-faith offer based on his reaction to everyone and that thread. Edit: - Inadvertent edit. Post restored. My bad! - Hordini |
|
|
|
Post by Emblematic Wolfblade on Oct 18, 2023 18:02:12 GMT -5
I think you missed my point. That seems to be a common excuse you use to avoid answering a direct question. I think we have a different definition of bullying, but using your definition, I'd say unwilling. I'm unwilling to pretend (for example) that your "right" to own a weapon designed to exclusively kill others, your opposition to any sort of regulation or training to own and use them, that militia means "anyone and everyone" when it's literally never been used that way, and so on are a reasonable set of stances that should be respected. |
|
|
|
Post by Hordini on Oct 18, 2023 18:04:23 GMT -5
your response was to create a megathread of his posts to dunk on him. No, my first response was to spend months trying to debunk or point out flaws in his points. It also wasn't a good-faith offer based on his reaction to everyone and that thread. I didn't say it was your first response. How would you expect someone to respond to a thread designed to bully them, especially if you still thought they could be reasoned with at the time? If he had already responded poorly to you trying to debunk or point out the flaws in his points for months before, did you think I thread like that was going to elicit a more fruitful reaction? |
|
|
|
Post by Hordini on Oct 18, 2023 18:09:22 GMT -5
That seems to be a common excuse you use to avoid answering a direct question. I think we have a different definition of bullying, but using your definition, I'd say unwilling. I'm unwilling to pretend (for example) that your "right" to own a weapon designed to exclusively kill others, your opposition to any sort of regulation or training to own and use them, that militia means "anyone and everyone" when it's literally never been used that way, and so on are a reasonable set of stances that should be respected. Respecting someone's stance and treating someone with respect are two different things. My issue is with the latter, not the former. I'm still doubtful you could accurately articulate my stance on anything because you are too focused on criticizing people you disagree with. You don't listen enough to try to understand the stance (or the topic, for that matter), and you go straight to accusing others of bad faith, lying, and being "full of shit." |
|
|
|
Post by Emblematic Wolfblade on Oct 18, 2023 18:09:24 GMT -5
No, my first response was to spend months trying to debunk or point out flaws in his points. It also wasn't a good-faith offer based on his reaction to everyone and that thread. I didn't say it was your first response. How would you expect someone to respond to a thread designed to bully them, especially if you still thought they could be reasoned with at the time? If he had already responded poorly to you trying to debunk or point out the flaws in his points for months before, did you think I thread like that was going to illicit a more fruitful reaction? No, and I don't think anyone else thought it'd get a fruitful discussion based on whembly NEVER EVER meaningfully contributing to a discussion even when others genuinely tried. Whembly, like RP, was never in any space for a real discussion, they were there to troll, and rile others up. I think we have a different definition of bullying, but using your definition, I'd say unwilling. I'm unwilling to pretend (for example) that your "right" to own a weapon designed to exclusively kill others, your opposition to any sort of regulation or training to own and use them, that militia means "anyone and everyone" when it's literally never been used that way, and so on are a reasonable set of stances that should be respected. Respecting someone's stance and treating someone with respect are two different things. My issue is with the latter, not the former. I'm still doubtful you could accurately articulate my stance on anything because you are too focused on criticizing people you disagree with. You don't listen enough to try to understand the stance (or the topic, for that matter), and you go straight to accusing others of bad faith, lying, and being "full of shit." Your stance on guns, for example, has been "no regulations, no restrictions," at least as much as we've been able to get out of you. And also avoiding any sort of evidence that guns lead to increased deaths per capita/more violence. Your stance also includes taking steps to solve problems caused (largely) by poverty, which I don't think anyone has disagreed with. |
|
|
|
Post by Hordini on Oct 18, 2023 18:10:20 GMT -5
That seems to be a common excuse you use to avoid answering a direct question. I think we have a different definition of bullying, but using your definition, I'd say unwilling. I'm unwilling to pretend (for example) that your "right" to own a weapon designed to exclusively kill others, your opposition to any sort of regulation or training to own and use them, that militia means "anyone and everyone" when it's literally never been used that way, and so on are a reasonable set of stances that should be respected. What's your definition of bullying? Is it okay if you decide they deserve it? |
|
|
|
Post by Hordini on Oct 18, 2023 18:12:35 GMT -5
I didn't say it was your first response. How would you expect someone to respond to a thread designed to bully them, especially if you still thought they could be reasoned with at the time? If he had already responded poorly to you trying to debunk or point out the flaws in his points for months before, did you think I thread like that was going to illicit a more fruitful reaction? No, and I don't think anyone else thought it'd get a fruitful discussion based on whembly NEVER EVER meaningfully contributing to a discussion even when others genuinely tried. Whembly, like RP, was never in any space for a real discussion, they were there to troll, and rile others up. I thought you said you did it back when you thought he could be reasoned with? Why did you waste so much time compiling that thread then? If you didn't think it'd be fruitful, what purpose did it serve? Honestly, that makes it sound even more like bullying. |
|
|
|
Post by Emblematic Wolfblade on Oct 18, 2023 18:18:33 GMT -5
No, and I don't think anyone else thought it'd get a fruitful discussion based on whembly NEVER EVER meaningfully contributing to a discussion even when others genuinely tried. Whembly, like RP, was never in any space for a real discussion, they were there to troll, and rile others up. I thought you said you did it back when you thought he could be reasoned with? Why did you waste so much time compiling that thread then? If you didn't think it'd be fruitful, what purpose did it serve? Honestly, that makes it sound even more like bullying. You can both hope for reasonable discussion and not expect it. Think of it like buying a lottery ticket. You can hope to win, but not expect it. The thought was if he was presented with actual evidence, maybe there was a slim chance he could be reasoned with... but I don't think anyone was really banking on it. I think we have a different definition of bullying, but using your definition, I'd say unwilling. I'm unwilling to pretend (for example) that your "right" to own a weapon designed to exclusively kill others, your opposition to any sort of regulation or training to own and use them, that militia means "anyone and everyone" when it's literally never been used that way, and so on are a reasonable set of stances that should be respected. What's your definition of bullying? Is it okay if you decide they deserve it? No, I believe that some stances do not deserve to be treated as reasonable or with respect, as if all stances or positions are equal. Just like I wouldn't treat a bigot with respect or kindness when they're actively spewing their crap, I will not respect your positions that go against all evidence and data we have, let alone your position that guns aren't the problem and do not contribute to increased deaths or violence. On second thought I suppose I wouldn't even really quibble with calling it bullying I guess, so call that bullying if you want. It's certainly rude, aggressive and belligerent... but I don't think even reasonable discussions or arguments would change your mind. You've certainly done a lot to avoid engaging with evidence people have brought up. |
|
|
|
Post by Hordini on Oct 18, 2023 18:25:11 GMT -5
I thought you said you did it back when you thought he could be reasoned with? Why did you waste so much time compiling that thread then? If you didn't think it'd be fruitful, what purpose did it serve? Honestly, that makes it sound even more like bullying. You can both hope for reasonable discussion and not expect it. Think of it like buying a lottery ticket. You can hope to win, but not expect it. The thought was if he was presented with actual evidence, maybe there was a slim chance he could be reasoned with... but I don't think anyone was really banking on it. What's your definition of bullying? Is it okay if you decide they deserve it? No, I believe that some stances do not deserve to be treated as reasonable or with respect. Just like I wouldn't treat a bigot with respect or kindness when they're actively spewing their crap, I will not respect your positions that go against all evidence and data we have. On second thought I suppose I wouldn't even really quibble with calling it bullying I guess, so call that bullying if you want. It's certainly rude, aggressive and belligerent... but I don't think even reasonable discussions or arguments would change your mind. You've certainly done a lot to avoid engaging with evidence people have brought up. In regards to hoping for reasonable discussion and not expecting it, that is certainly reasonable, in general. But how could you even hope for a thread like that to elicit a reasonable response? A thread like that would appear to be almost designed to elicit a negative response. How could you have any basis to expect that reasonable discussions or arguments wouldn't change my mind? Your reactions have been almost exclusively rude, aggressive, and belligerent. |
|
|
|
Post by Emblematic Wolfblade on Oct 18, 2023 18:34:39 GMT -5
In regards to hoping for reasonable discussion and not expecting it, that is certainly reasonable, in general. But how could you even hope for a thread like that to elicit a reasonable response? A thread like that would appear to be almost designed to illicit a negative response. Because it was literally what they asked for, multiple times. If you ask for something, and I don't know if you have any right to be offended when someone does it. How could you have any basis to expect that reasonable discussions or arguments wouldn't change my mind? Your reactions have been almost exclusively rude, aggressive, and belligerent. Because every single time anyone else does you either dismiss their evidence, quibble about how shooters weren't REALLY ever part of the "well-regulated militia," ignore the evidence, or try to deflect all the blame of gun violence onto poverty. Or that mandatory training is unreasonable (I don't think you ever answered if you hold that view for driving by the way) among other things. And here's the kicker, I agreed with your last post, mostly. I think basically everyone did and does and has for quite awhile, my issue is the refusal to blame guns, gun owners, or a lack of regulation for any responsibility in the US's incredibly high (compared to other 1st world countries) homicide/violence rate. Not "gun violence" or "gun homicide" just homicide and violence in general. Even when presented with what evidence we have you dismiss it, or ignore it, and it doesn't really matter who presents it or how they present it. |
|
skyth
OT Cowboy
Posts: 324
|
Post by skyth on Oct 18, 2023 18:45:21 GMT -5
I agree that some positions shouldn't be treated with respect. Come in and spew bigoted shit, don't expect respect. Also, some things are not for the person you are responding to, but rather for the other people reading the thread. 'Bullying' a bigot (Though I don't agree that it's actually bullying, just an appropriate response to that sort of bs) is more showing that their 'opinions' are not socially acceptable. Is it 'bullying' a murderer to arrest them and throw them in prison?
Reminds me of the story about the barkeep that threw out the 'respectful' Nazi with the dog whistle insignias because if he allowed him there, he'd bring his friends and turn his bar into a Nazi bar...
|
|
|
|
Post by Hordini on Oct 18, 2023 18:52:05 GMT -5
In regards to hoping for reasonable discussion and not expecting it, that is certainly reasonable, in general. But how could you even hope for a thread like that to elicit a reasonable response? A thread like that would appear to be almost designed to illicit a negative response. Because it was literally what they asked for, multiple times. If you ask for something, and I don't know if you have any right to be offended when someone does it. How could you have any basis to expect that reasonable discussions or arguments wouldn't change my mind? Your reactions have been almost exclusively rude, aggressive, and belligerent. Because every single time anyone else does you either dismiss their evidence, quibble about how shooters weren't REALLY ever part of the "well-regulated militia," ignore the evidence, or try to deflect all the blame of gun violence onto poverty. Or that mandatory training is unreasonable (I don't think you ever answered if you hold that view for driving by the way) among other things. And here's the kicker, I agreed with your last post, mostly. I think basically everyone did and does and has for quite awhile, my issue is the refusal to blame guns, gun owners, or a lack of regulation for any responsibility in the US's incredibly high (compared to other 1st world countries) homicide/violence rate. Not "gun violence" or "gun homicide" just homicide and violence in general. Even when presented with what evidence we have you dismiss it, or ignore it, and it doesn't really matter who presents it or how they present it. Similar to a large number of you interactions here, it's not what you did, it's how you did it. Someone asking for examples doesn't mean they want you to create a megathread to bully them. It's so much content, where are they even supposed to start? To the last part, wow, you agree, imagine that! I expected you probably would. We probably agree on multiple things and we could have gotten there years ago if you could have pumped the brakes for just a few minutes on the rudeness, aggression, and belligerence. Most of the occasions in which I've "dismissed" or "ignored" something is because I'd rather just withdraw from the discussion and stay away from this place for a few days because of members who behave like you. Even when someone else presents a reasonable, respectful argument, there have been many times where I'd just rather not get into it because I know you are going to butt in with your toxic attitude and try to dominate the discussion. It's not "ignoring" and "dismissing" as much as it is "not willing to put up with your bullying." |
|
|
|
Post by Emblematic Wolfblade on Oct 18, 2023 19:01:09 GMT -5
Similar to a large number of you interactions here, it's not what you did, it's how you did it. Someone asking for examples doesn't mean they want you to create a megathread to bully them. It's so much content, where are they even supposed to start? At the top. No, really! At the top, that's where I'd start. Or pick a random one. It doesn't matter really, because whembly simply handwaved away anyone bringing up smaller numbers of examples to them multiple times, and I really wasn't interested in trying to find the magic number that isn't too much or too few. Even when someone else presents a reasonable, respectful argument, there have been many times where I'd just rather not get into it because I know you are going to butt in with your toxic attitude and try to dominate the discussion. It's not "ignoring" and "dismissing" as much as it is "not willing to put up with your bullying." Well, here's your chance to engage with others. I promised to stay out of it, and so far I haven't responded to you or anyone else in that thread, like I said. And I plan to not respond to you in it, so you'll maybe actually address or engage with others' posts. I may post news of mass shootings or whatever, but I'm not going to reply to your posts unless you respond to one of my posts (and keep replys to others engaging with your posts to a minimum, such as if they're asking for evidence or a study or something I know of offhand, such as gun control/ownership views being pretty strictly divided between parties). |
|
|
|
Post by Hordini on Oct 18, 2023 19:01:23 GMT -5
I agree that some positions shouldn't be treated with respect. Come in and spew bigoted shit, don't expect respect. Also, some things are not for the person you are responding to, but rather for the other people reading the thread. 'Bullying' a bigot (Though I don't agree that it's actually bullying, just an appropriate response to that sort of bs) is more showing that their 'opinions' are not socially acceptable. Is it 'bullying' a murderer to arrest them and throw them in prison? Reminds me of the story about the barkeep that threw out the 'respectful' Nazi with the dog whistle insignias because if he allowed him there, he'd bring his friends and turn his bar into a Nazi bar... Respecting a position and respecting a person are two different things. You can demonstrate that something isn't socially acceptable without bullying someone. Even for the people reading the thread, you can demonstrate something is unacceptable without bullying someone. And in this case we're not just talking about responding to bigots or demonstrating that something is socially unacceptable. No, it is not bullying a murderer to arrest them and throw them in prison. |
|
