Anonymity, Trump supporters, the right-wing media, and the gman account

Politics and religion
602

I’m not going to respond to issue of religions and other topics. because there are better threads, my apologies.

Sharpe makes a strong case that Gman was a being dick, god knows he was obsessive. IMO, Gman wouldn’t make the top 10 list of dickish behavior in QT3 over the last few years. Pretty clearly, I’m in the minority on that opinion. I stopped engaging with the guy because of the employer situation, and the possibility that QT3 was being used a lab experiment for Trump propagandist. I suspect that’s probably not the case.

I do think we missed a opportunity to get inside the mind of a Trump supporter, an intelligent, articulate, reasonably well informed, and generally polite one at that. We are serious trouble in the next election if Gman is typical of Trump supporter. But all this is water under the bridge. The asshole President causes enough drama that we don’t need more in the forum.

But I do have one request going forward. Will people stop with “bad faith” accusation. I’m bit sensitive because @scottagibson accused me along with others of doing so. I find it exceedingly arrogant, that people can read what some dude on the internet wrote and with limited to no knowledge of the person, leap to the conclusion that person doesn’t believe what they wrote, or is being deliberately deceptive. I feel like I must of missed out on some class “how to read minds on the internet.”

I stop reading the Gmans posts a while ago, but I honestly didn’t see any evidence that he didn’t believe what he wrote. I’m not even totally convinced that he was trolling us, although that’s a distinct possibility cause its clearly Trump’s tactic.

As for Gman not engaging, nitpicking, moving goal post, repeating boiler plates. Can I just say it happens all the time to me. I’ll write 5 or 6 paragraph with main point and several supporting points or even just an aside, and the main point gets ignored and one of the side points get picked apart. I could make the case that people are arguing in bad faith, but I think it is far more likely that with limited time to address all my point, with a conclusion that people disagree with, it is just the thing that people most strongly disagreed with. Anyway as someone closer to Gman’s poltiical views, that’s what most of his arguments looked like to me.

603

Ah yes, your argument that stupid ideas and people have to be opposed. And I agree with that in general.

In this case however, the opposing should just have been an instant ban. Engaging in ‘serious’ discussion with a troll/tribalist only creates the impression that there was validity to the shit he was spewing.

So yeah. Idiots.

604

I don’t really want to reopen the wound. I was unhappy that I gave you two citations to rebut a point you made, and your only response was to dismiss one on no basis other than the publication date and to completely disregard the other. I did not mean to say that you didn’t believe the things you were arguing (the common definition of ‘bad faith’). I meant to say that your response to my counter was not a good-faith effort to consider my arguments.

I did. He was too smart not to see where his arguments had failed, yet he continued to advance them.

605

Only an idiot would think that. 😉

606

How many times do I have to apologise for farting at your family dinner, Strollen?

607

Here’s the thing: “Bad faith” does not mean “not considering my awesome arguments.” It might be that your arguments are not so awesome, and not even worthy of a response.

608

Yes, that’s what I just fucking acknowledged.

You do see that part, right?

609

Yes, fair enough. I had meant to add a disclaimer like “This is not directed only at you” but my inner pedant mashed the Send button a little early.

610

Few modern democracies have the death penalty at all. In fact, an EU country that executes someone will get kicked out of the club.

Since America officially supports use of the death penalty, should the EU refuse to allow Americans in because they might corrupt their enlightened approach? Europeans, that’s a rhetorical question! But it’s the same argument used to exclude Muslims.

611

I heard this call to prayer fives times a day for the first almost seven years of my life. It remains a sound that is forever ingrained in me.

I visited my homeland last year and got up very early in morning several times so that I could sit on the front porch to sip on my Kopi O and listen to this captivating, mournful tune again.

612

Hah. I wish I’d been with you!

I was in Sevilla and Granada for several weeks last month, and I kept thinking that something in those beautiful cities was missing. It was that, the call to prayer. Especially in the Albayzin.

613

I’m still trying to figure out what you think this means.

614

To echo a point Tom made, it isn’t really that Islam is unique among religions (in fairness, I think the “religion of peace” bit isn’t unique to Islam, either), per se, it’s how men use it. The intersection between Islam as religion and Islam as a tool of state power is thin in many countries. In contrast, there are no where near as many “Christian states”. Basically, if you have a fill-in-the-blank state religion, then those in power are often using that religion as a control mechanism. Harshly enforcing that religion is, effectively, maintaining control.

Islam is younger than Christianity. Christianity went through the same abuse as a state tool, it just did it earlier. My understanding is that Thailand, for example, did the same thing with Buddhism, earlier.

That’s why it’s important to maintain precision: I think modern democracies should vigorously oppose the abuses of authoritarian states (many of which use Islam as a tool) versus vigorously opposing Muslims. Unfortunately, many people aren’t good at maintaining that separation.

615

Anyone who reads this and thinks these people are motivated by economic fears is engaging in willful self-deceit. This is eye-watering bad.

616

Almost as if there might be some other explanation for why some countries are backwards, authoritarian regimes! Given everything we know about history and geography, the religion seems to have little, if anything, to do with religion.

617

I just caught up on this thread. Wow.

Gman, you are an utter piece of shit. So are your friends who pose ridiculous questions a 3 year knows the answer to, like “is it wrong for me to not care that infants are in jail for the equivalent of a their parents jaywalking? Is that wrong?”

You’re a PIECE. OF. SHIT.

618

My 1 cent.

  • This is a left leaning forum where I expect the center left people to be on the right side of the median. And if you’re conservative you’re one of a handful of people. Which means you stand-out and have different standards in P&R. For example, you can’t respond to everything because then you swamp the forum as many people jump to challenge you. So even if you’re just responding individually you’d be writing about 10x the next person, which rapidly becomes obnoxious. The downside is that by not responding to every post, it is seen as if you didn’t respond to this pt, your’e incorrect. It can be a catch-22.

  • This is primarily a gaming forum and not a debating/philosophy club. So some topics, particularly in today’s environment are wiser to be left alone.

  • I feel a lot more comfortable with wumpus or at least no longer at admin. His zeal is very different if you’re not someone who agrees with him politically.

  • I have been heartened by the defense of the free exchange of ideas by some I have argued with strenuously on certain topics.

  • My personal view of the world is that communities work best with bonded with social, civil agreements. Arguing continually can disrupt that social contract. So I have little problem with the gman acct closing. Been better if the person just took some time off and not respond at all. That said, the attacks/interaction are far out of the norm and it appeared to me like a witch hunt. The accusations of racism were overblown and cheapens the debate/term.

619

Oh, that’s a good way of looking at it. I was hoping to keep this generic and away from Islam, but I guess I’d have to say that I haven’t seen much evidence of Islam as a force for peace in the last two decades, even if we leave Wahhabism and it’s more extreme offshoots to one side ( which I think we should!). I’d love to hear about examples.

620

Ya’ll, if you’re not aware, Tom has a masters in theological studies from Harvard Divinity. Whatever he says is his opinion, but he’s put a lot more thought into religion than the vast majority of us. Just putting that out there.

621

I just want to echo what Tom says after this post and say I think this post of yours really cuts down to the bone. I’m one of those who just chose to ignore, once I found out some of the back story. I felt like we need other voices here, and we should have learned that from our utter shock on the night of the election. We didn’t see that coming at all, and part of that is because of the echo chamber issue. It is natural to invite people to your house that you like, and often the people you like share your views. But sometimes you need to talk to people who have other views, for balance.

God. I hate that I just hesitated to use the word ‘balance’ in that sentence. Thanks Fox.

At any rate, I skimmed a couple of posts that made clear what you’re saying, @Sharpe. That there was bad faith here, and it occurred to me the other night what this reminded me of.

Sorry to bring this up, but it reminded me of the “The Andrea Doria” episode of Seinfeld (S8E10). I’m not being glib here, so bear with me.

A subplot in that episode involved a guy they referred to as a “bad-breaker-upper” because when he broke up with women, he would say that one thing that would eat at them. That would drive them crazy. He had this ability to hone in on weakness or insecurity and say it simply and cleanly. It would then get him stabbed by the woman, or have another woman throw coffee in his face, or whatever. He tells Elaine she has a big head and she laughs it off, saying, “Is that all you’ve got?” incredulously, but then it festers. Because he knows just how to find that little chink in the armor. That’s his superpower.

I think this argument style you describe is analogous to that. Finding that thing that will set people off that has little to do with the argument at hand, and make certain people unable to ignore, because the words fester, or immediately set them off, because the poster knew the exact right spot to use the reflex hammer.

I’ve met the guy. I’ve been personally nice to him, as I am to all guests in my home. Because that’s the way I am. And honestly, if he were to show up at my front door with a bottle of wine, I’d invite him in and cook him dinner. Because I believe in what I said above. That you have to maintain relationships with those you disagree with, and often these relationships benefit you. I have two great friends I strongly disagree with politically. They are smart and funny and my life would be less without them. But I’ll be totally honest with them about our disagreements, and they with me.

This is too long. It’s been simmering in my head, so forgive me. But Sharp’s post really made me want to express some of this. The guy was the bad-breaker-upper who knew how to get a rise out of people. As I’ve said elsewhere, I think he was just performing an experiment, and that experiment turned out to be more successful than he thought it would be.

I wish we could have avoided the conflagration by denying it oxygen, but we could not. And I’m sad about that. Because I like dissenting voices, and I wish we had more.

-xtien