#RedditRevolt

[BruceVC]

Eh, it's not that rare of a word...although I'll admit that I've only used it a handful of times in real life. Not too uncommon on forum boards where people are constantly arguing, as at least a few people are bound to have taken a class or two on logical fallacies.

It isn't a common word trust me, I study English words and know words that are commonly used 

[Bartimaeus]

I didn't say it's a common word: just not that rare, particularly if logic is being debated. Also, your experience is entirely anecdotal...my old high school English teacher loved to use it whenever he could to point out people's inability to logically reason (or when they're trying to "logically" - in their mind - reason when, in reality, logic has little to do with their reasoning). Nomenclature varies from place to place, from setting to setting.

Edited July 15, 2015 by Bartimaeus

[BruceVC]

I didn't say it's a common word: just not that rare, particularly if logic is being debated. Also, your experience is entirely anecdotal...my old high school English teacher loved to use it whenever he could to point out people's inability to logically reason (or when they're trying to "logically" - in their mind - reason when, in reality, logic has little to do with their reasoning). Nomenclature varies from place to place, from setting to setting.

No I speak from fact, I'll  mention some words now that I guarantee you wont know...don't look them up just be honest

 

• pusillanimous
• punctilious
• turpitude
• specious 

[Bartimaeus]

I've heard of all but the third one, though specious is the only one I actually know the meaning of. Your condescension does you no favors, Bruce.

Edited July 15, 2015 by Bartimaeus

[BruceVC]

I've heard of all but the third one, though specious is the only one I actually know the meaning of. Your condescension does you no favors, Bruce.

 

Its weird my girlfriend called me condescending...in fact I have been called that by people before. I don't think its true ? What do you think ?

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

I've heard of all but the third one, though specious is the only one I actually know the meaning of. Your condescension does you no favors, Bruce.

 

Its weird my girlfriend called me condescending...in fact I have been called that by people before. I don't think its true ? What do you think ?

 

 

Well I dunno, congratulating someone on knowing the word "tautology" does strike me as a bit... patronizing

 

I did not know the other four though, so who knows, maybe my knowledge of the English language is limited enough to count "knowing the word 'tautology'" as an achievement...

[Bartimaeus]

 

I've heard of all but the third one, though specious is the only one I actually know the meaning of. Your condescension does you no favors, Bruce.

 

Its weird my girlfriend called me condescending...in fact I have been called that by people before. I don't think its true ? What do you think ?

 

You are, by far, the most condescending person I can think of on these forums, Bruce. So many of your posts just ooze an "I know better than you" tone, or a "lol, do you REALLY think that? (smirk)" tone, or the patronizing "you shouldn't let anyone else (that I disagree with) determine your thinking instead of coming to your own conclusions yourself, because apparently I don't think that you're capable of already doing so unless I tell you to do it...and as I'm telling you what to think myself" posts...or the silly "congratulating" posts you give people who you agree with without adding any additional content yourself, where most other people would just like their post instead... There're reasons people have problems with your particular style of posting, Bruce, that they don't have with other people they disagree with.

 

Do I hate ya' for it? No, particularly considering I don't think it's intentional...but it does tend to get annoying in some of these topics...

Edited July 15, 2015 by Bartimaeus

[Malcador]

Man, to be the most condescending person on THIS forum...that's a hell of a charge.

[Fighter]

 

Again alum... "I know better. I'm more qualified. I'm more experienced." This has no meaning, just self imposed titles.

 

 

Let me explain to you in detail, then.

 

What you claimed to be an attempt at emulating "the SJW lingo" was essentially this sentence: "[a harpy made of corn syrup is] an appropriately toxic image for the slow poison it is". Whereas, one assumes, "the slow poison" refers both to corn syrup (which is spectacularly unhealthy) and TEH EVILZ OF FEMINISM (who will, presumably, take all of our freedomz in seemingly-innocuous baby steps, hence "slow" and "poison"). Problem with the usage of "toxic image" is that a/ it either directly refers to "slow poison" itself, which is, while technically true, also a tautology (poison is toxic, who would've thought?) or b/ it's about the feminist harpies slowly poisoning our society, which would be golden, except...

 

While "SJWs" don't categorically reserve the term "toxic" to inanimate phenomena, whenever it's used to characterize people, it generally refers to the kind who make civil conversation impossible by their very presence (you probably know the type, loud, abrasive, have no clue of what they're talking about), not those who are insidious and manipulative. Hence, if "slow poison" refers to feminists, the usage of "toxic" wouldn't really apply, since in your interpretation, society doesn't realize it's been poisoned UNTIL IT'S TOO LATE (dun dun dun!). Or if we're specifically referring to the subgroup of feminists who are toxic, the "slow poison" term is inadequate.

 

Therefore, we have three possibilities: either the usage of "toxic" in the sentence is a tautology, or it fails to emulate the conventions of the group you claim to mock, or your metaphor is a mess.

 

 

(Also, as someone who has a passing familiarity with how human bodies work, I take issue with the implied characterization of corn syrup as "toxic". It's about as toxic as table salt, ie. while it can kill you, it's really not a very practical way of poisoning someone.)

 

 

1) I don't think I'm misunderstanding "SJWs".

2) If I do it's not really my job to understand their bizarre reinventions of commonly understood words when they are trying to talk to the public.

 

1) Most people who misunderstand something generally don't realize they misunderstand it. Hence misunderstanding, not "un-understanding".

2) If you're attempting to satirize a group's usage of words, yes, it's kind of your job to understand how they're actually using those words. Or at least to not throw a butthurt temper tantrum when someone corrects you.

 

 

That is spectacularly nerdy and convoluted and picky way to dismiss something that you didn't like. I may get back to it... None of it however is news that I didn't know and is so utterly irrelevant to my using the same words for their negative associating and meaning that is both correct and emulates what they are trying to say well enough in terms of the general direction of the idea.

 

Also, my god, the corn syrup... just to drive home the pedantic pickiness.

Edited July 15, 2015 by Fighter

[BruceVC]

 

 

I've heard of all but the third one, though specious is the only one I actually know the meaning of. Your condescension does you no favors, Bruce.

 

Its weird my girlfriend called me condescending...in fact I have been called that by people before. I don't think its true ? What do you think ?

 

You are, by far, the most condescending person I can think of on these forums, Bruce. So many of your posts just ooze a "I know better than you" tone, or a "lol, do you REALLY think that? (smirk)" tone, or the patronizing "you shouldn't let anyone else (that I disagree with) determine your thinking instead of coming to your own conclusions yourself, because apparently I don't think you're already capable of doing so...and as I'm telling you what to think myself" posts...or the silly "congratulating" posts you give people who you agree with without adding any additional content yourself, where most other people would just like their post instead... There're reasons people have problems with your particular style of posting, Bruce, that they don't have with other people they disagree with.

 

Do I hate ya' for it? No, particularly considering I don't think it's intentional...but it does tend to get annoying in some of these topics...

 

 

I find this post  hard to believe, I think you are misunderstanding me on certain levels. Its not condescension to share information and we should be able to constructively criticize each other. You right I am worried you opinion is influenced by others....but I only asked because I'm concerned...so this is also not condescension    

[Bartimaeus]

Sure, but when you format your "criticism" in a specific way time after time... You just told Kaine Parker recently, in this topic or one on a similar subject, to not be influenced by a select few posters you disagreed with and instead come to his own conclusions by looking at what a few other posters you agree with have to say... It's so insulting, as if we're not capable of rational thought that could possibly disagree with yours...so you have to remind people that yes, they should use their brains to consider all points of view and whatever pieces evidence there are. You've done the same thing to me at least twice that I can think of, so I'm speaking from (anecdotal) experience here, Mr. "No I speak from fact, I'll mention some words now that I guarantee you wont know...don't look them up just be honest".

Edited July 15, 2015 by Bartimaeus

[BruceVC]

 

 

I've heard of all but the third one, though specious is the only one I actually know the meaning of. Your condescension does you no favors, Bruce.

 

Its weird my girlfriend called me condescending...in fact I have been called that by people before. I don't think its true ? What do you think ?

 

 

Well I dunno, congratulating someone on knowing the word "tautology" does strike me as a bit... patronizing

 

I did not know the other four though, so who knows, maybe my knowledge of the English language is limited enough to count "knowing the word 'tautology'" as an achievement...

 

 

No I was paying you a compliment as I notice the usage of unusual words, I wouldn't patronize you as I respect you too much. As  I have said you support SJ  issues and I think you are the smartest debater on these forums ...that doesn't mean you are cleverest person in RL but you do make excellent  and convincing arguments so why would I insult you...that would be inconsistent behavior  

[BruceVC]

Sure, but when you format your "criticism" in a specific way time after time... You just told Kaine Parker recently, in this topic or one on a similar subject, to not be influenced by a select few posters you disagreed with and instead come to his own conclusions by looking at what a few other posters you agree with have to say... It's so insulting, as if we're not capable of rational thought that could possibly disagree with yours...so you have to remind people that yes, they should use their brains to consider all points of view and whatever pieces evidence there are. You've done the same thing to me at least twice that I can think of, so I'm speaking from (anecdotal) experience here, Mr. "No I speak from fact, I'll mention some words now that I guarantee you wont know...don't look them up just be honest".

 

And you have to admit I was right about his view on Greece....its weird to see an American, especially a Texan, supporting and justifying  the Greeks failure to implement austerity. Only some  people from the PIGS countries and people who are anti-Western would look at the Greek situation and seriously defend there lack of good governance 

 

I could lie to you and say " no Greece has a valid reason to not pay back the loans" but I don't like lying to people I respect   

  

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

 

Sure, but when you format your "criticism" in a specific way time after time... You just told Kaine Parker recently, in this topic or one on a similar subject, to not be influenced by a select few posters you disagreed with and instead come to his own conclusions by looking at what a few other posters you agree with have to say... It's so insulting, as if we're not capable of rational thought that could possibly disagree with yours...so you have to remind people that yes, they should use their brains to consider all points of view and whatever pieces evidence there are. You've done the same thing to me at least twice that I can think of, so I'm speaking from (anecdotal) experience here, Mr. "No I speak from fact, I'll mention some words now that I guarantee you wont know...don't look them up just be honest".

 

And you have to admit I was right about his view on Greece....its weird to see an American, especially a Texan, supporting and justifying the Greeks failure to implement austerity. Only some people from the PIGS countries and people who are anti-Western would look at the Greek situation and seriously defend there lack of good governance

 

I could lie to you and say " no Greece has a valid reason to not pay back the loans" but I don't like lying to people I respect

Bruce not only did you fail to support your position with evidence, you failed to debunk mine and had to retreat to a "agree to disagree". As it stands my position that implementing austerity(most of which will impact workers) when Greece is facing 20%+ unemployment and declining real wages so that Greece can get an extension on a loan it can not pay off in its current state has gone unchallenged by fact, with rhetoric about balancing budgets and the glory of privatization being thrown around instead. Like I challenged you to do in the Greece thread, If I'm wrong prove it using facts. Edited July 15, 2015 by KaineParker

[Bartimaeus]

 

Sure, but when you format your "criticism" in a specific way time after time... You just told Kaine Parker recently, in this topic or one on a similar subject, to not be influenced by a select few posters you disagreed with and instead come to his own conclusions by looking at what a few other posters you agree with have to say... It's so insulting, as if we're not capable of rational thought that could possibly disagree with yours...so you have to remind people that yes, they should use their brains to consider all points of view and whatever pieces evidence there are. You've done the same thing to me at least twice that I can think of, so I'm speaking from (anecdotal) experience here, Mr. "No I speak from fact, I'll mention some words now that I guarantee you wont know...don't look them up just be honest".

 

And you have to admit I was right about his view on Greece....its weird to see an American, especially a Texan, supporting and justifying  the Greeks failure to implement austerity. Only some  people from the PIGS countries and people who are anti-Western would look at the Greek situation and seriously defend there lack of good governance

 

No...no, I really don't. Your argument against Kaine was, "The people you're agreeing with are biased, the people I'm agreeing with aren't: won't you reconsider, now that I've brought this to light?". I mean...what is that? That's ridiculous, that's what it is. Even if you were correct, saying stuff like that - and reframing the discussion like you just did with your latest post, something I've complained about more than a few times now - undermines your credibility so much that it's hard to treat you seriously. I don't know what to do with ya', Bruce.

Edited July 15, 2015 by Bartimaeus

[aluminiumtrioxid]

emulates what they are trying to say well enough in terms of the general direction of the idea. That is spectacularly nerdy and convoluted and picky way to dismiss something that you didn't like.

 

...That's really not how satire aimed at particular styles of expression works.

 

Has it never occurred to you that when you're specifically trying to satirize word usage, emulating said word usage "well enough, in terms of general direction" is just not gonna cut it, because it's the very thing you're trying to get right?

 

Also:

 

That is spectacularly nerdy and convoluted and picky way to dismiss something that you didn't like.

 

"Hah... NERD" is a great way to end a debate on the playground, but it kind of loses much of its impact when discussing things on a video gaming forum 

Edited July 15, 2015 by aluminiumtrioxid

[Fighter]

 

...That's really not how satire aimed at particular styles of expression works.

 

Has it never occurred to you that when you're specifically trying to satirize word usage, emulating said word usage "well enough, in terms of general direction" is just not gonna cut it, because it's the very thing you're trying to get right?

 

First of all you're the only one who used the word satire. I never said it was satire. I did use their lingo somewhat dramatically and hyperbolically to perhaps hint at the hypocrisies. Second your nitpicks are still nonsense. Toxic is toxic, it's pretty simple and differences in use you've described in such detail aren't worth talking about. You demand an exact replication when a general use of the notion of toxicity when it comes to behavior is just fine. Third you can be a toxic person (in your subscribed interpretation) and be a slowly poisoning presence, one doesn't negate the other. It's not like you can easily get rid of them can you.

 

"Hah... NERD" is a great way to end a debate on the playground, but it kind of loses much of its impact when discussing things on a video gaming forum 

 

When you begin to act like a caricature playground stereotype like from some kid movie you get a playground argument...

Edited July 15, 2015 by Fighter

[BruceVC]

 

 

Sure, but when you format your "criticism" in a specific way time after time... You just told Kaine Parker recently, in this topic or one on a similar subject, to not be influenced by a select few posters you disagreed with and instead come to his own conclusions by looking at what a few other posters you agree with have to say... It's so insulting, as if we're not capable of rational thought that could possibly disagree with yours...so you have to remind people that yes, they should use their brains to consider all points of view and whatever pieces evidence there are. You've done the same thing to me at least twice that I can think of, so I'm speaking from (anecdotal) experience here, Mr. "No I speak from fact, I'll mention some words now that I guarantee you wont know...don't look them up just be honest".

And you have to admit I was right about his view on Greece....its weird to see an American, especially a Texan, supporting and justifying the Greeks failure to implement austerity. Only some people from the PIGS countries and people who are anti-Western would look at the Greek situation and seriously defend there lack of good governance

 

I could lie to you and say " no Greece has a valid reason to not pay back the loans" but I don't like lying to people I respect

Bruce not only did you fail to support your position with evidence, you failed to debunk mine and had to retreat to a "agree to disagree". As it stands my position that implementing austerity(most of which will impact workers) when Greece is facing 20%+ unemployment and declining real wages so that Greece can get an extension on a loan it can not pay off in its current state has gone unchallenged by fact, with rhetoric about balancing budgets and the glory of privatization being thrown around instead. Like I challenged you to do in the Greece thread, If I'm wrong prove it using facts.

 

 KP you have the potential to become really influential and effective at debates on forums about RL topics but you need to learn to control your emotion, become more analytical and learn to accept when you are wrong. 

 

When we had that debate I can accept that your view carried some validity ...the argument " its completely unreasonable to expect the Greeks  to commit to the Troika austerity terms considering the circumstances of the Greek economy " resonated on many levels

 

But this view was completely disputed when Tsipras won the NO vote and then promptly created new, more severe austerity  terms and had them accepted by the EU and the Greek parliament. You cant make your argument because its been proven patently false by Tsipras himself and is therefore moot

 

But he played the game of brinkmanship very well and  at the end when it became apparent Greece would get kicked out the EU and he would receive no further austerity relief he conceded to even more harsh austerity just to stay in the EU

 

But this is an example where you mustn't blame yourself for being fooled....we all thought he was sincere

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

The fact that a poltician flipfloped and accepted a bad deal is proof that austerity isn't bad for Greece?

 

.....I honestly can't describe how strange that argument is.

Edited July 15, 2015 by KaineParker

[BruceVC]

The fact that a poltician flipfloped and accepted a bad deal is proof that austerity isn't bad for Greece?

 

.....I honestly can't describe how strange that argument is.

 I'm sorry if I am coming  across as lecturing you, I know this must be annoying

 

Just forget its me saying it and take it constructively. 

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

The fact that a poltician flipfloped and accepted a bad deal is proof that austerity isn't bad for Greece?

.....I honestly can't describe how strange that argument is.

 

 I'm sorry if I am coming  across as lecturing you, I know this must be annoying

 

Just forget its me saying it and take it constructively.

It's not that so much as it's completely nonsensical to use that, a move that confounded almost everyone and was the reason for the departure of the deputy finance minister, as proof to support your opinion. This is on top of you saying that unemployment and standard of living, things austerity usually negatively affects, have no bearing on the success of austerity.

 

I'm going to be honest, I'm almost positive you're a troll and that discussing anything with you is a waste of my time. I think I'm finally going to allow myself to be influenced by those foul anti-west cretiuns Zor and numbers and just start ignoring you from here on out.

[BruceVC]

 

 

The fact that a poltician flipfloped and accepted a bad deal is proof that austerity isn't bad for Greece?

.....I honestly can't describe how strange that argument is.

 I'm sorry if I am coming  across as lecturing you, I know this must be annoying

 

Just forget its me saying it and take it constructively.

It's not that so much as it's completely nonsensical to use that, a move that confounded almost everyone and was the reason for the departure of the deputy finance minister, as proof to support your opinion. This is on top of you saying that unemployment and standard of living, things austerity usually negatively affects, have no bearing on the success of austerity.

 

I'm going to be honest, I'm almost positive you're a troll and that discussing anything with you is a waste of my time. I think I'm finally going to allow myself to be influenced by those foul anti-west cretiuns Zor and numbers and just start ignoring you from here on out.

 

 Sure, you can do that. You will just be denying yourself a different and relevant insight

 

But  I understand my view is intimidating and some people hide behind the point '"  you a troll ...I am going to ignore you " ( yet most people never seem to ignore me ) because they don't like being proven wrong

 

I cant help you with your confidence and how to take constructive criticism. Thats on you

[Bartimaeus]

I don't wish to sound overtly hostile like Mr. Parker did in his previous post, but...I can't remember a single time you've ever actually convinced anybody of anything in these social issue topics, Bruce. Actually...that's not completely true: what I meant to say is that I can't remember a single time you've ever actually convinced anybody of your own viewpoint: I can definitely remember you convincing people of the opposite, of what you're arguing against.

[BruceVC]

I don't wish to sound overtly hostile like Mr. Parker did in his previous post, but...I can't remember a single time you've ever actually convinced anybody of anything in these social issue topics, Bruce. Actually...that's not completely true: what I meant to say is that I can't remember a single time you've ever actually convinced anybody of your own viewpoint: I can definitely remember you convincing people of the opposite, of what you're arguing against.

 Barti I didn't mean to sound rude to KP but the reality is I dont have the interest to try to convince someone they need to debate with me

 

KP was wrong about Greece and I explained why ..,...his whole argument about the Greeks not having the economic resources to stick to austerity was proven false when Tsipras agreed to his own harsher austerity. Its not that my point proved KP wrong ,,,the Greeks did this themselves 

 

Yet he still refuses to see this ...I can't do anymore about such intransigence. And then he has the cheek to say " he cant debate with me because I'm a troll...." 

[Bartimaeus]