Clearly I don’t understand shitposting as well as I thought, because I have no idea what the difference is.
tl;dr: I work for the Democratic National Committee, and we’ve been tasked with seeing how liberals react to idiocy. There are a couple dozen of us working various forums. My report is due Monday, so I won’t be around a lot after that.
Generally speaking, when new members of an internet community show up and want to engage with the community they lurk for a bit and then start a conversation, taking into account the things they learned while lurking.
Generally speaking, when new members of an internet community show up and have an instant and immediate objections to the tone of the community, they find another community whose tone they find more acceptable.
Generally speaking, when new members of an internet community show up for the sole purpose of trolling the community and “harvest liberal tears for the lulz” or whatever, they make a bunch of garbage “tone” arguments.
Generally speaking.
Oh I see, so it’s my fault for trying to remain to have a conversation with the few people here who have made important, substantive comments. Got it. Can’t at all be the fault of people who have now made dozens of posts for the sole purpose of antagonizing me, derailing threads just to make nasty personal attacks.
Well, I’d like to stay to continue having those conversations with the productive posters here, because there are several. Let me know if I need your permission for that.
Honestly: Yes.
I almost quit posting in P&R forever because I didn’t support punching Nazis hard enough, and that makes me a Nazi in the eyes of some people here. It upset me, but I understand the anger of some posters here because conservatives currently control all three branches of the U.S federal government.
If Hillary had won in 2016 your tone might be more acceptable. As it is, you’ve been both upsetting the Qt3 status quo and “punching down” since you’ve arrived. Challenging the board’s orthodoxy might be useful in some ways, but there are much more effective ways to challenge the Qt3 orthodoxy than your rampant shitposting.
My 100% sincere advice: If you want to be welcome here, you should read (and think) more and post less. (This is not the same as never posting.) Spend a few hours (or tens of hours!) in the archive. I lurked for years before posting here.
I appreciate your advice – though really, what is “rampant shitposting” if not what 90% of posters targeting me have been doing? If the idea is that they get a pass because Democrats aren’t in power, do you really think it will be acceptable for me to come in here when Democrats take back Congress later this year and just accuse everyone of being a dingbat communist and derail all the threads? Regardless, there are some posters here who do make really good points and I will try my hardest to take your advice and only reply to them in the future (after reading their posts carefully), since apparently responding to attacks on me is “shitposting.”
They get a pass because it’s their community.
I’ve started to ask you to stop doing that a couple of times and refrained. It’s hard to sit there and take punches. Nor is it fair that you should have to when people have repeatedly done the things they accuse you of doing. But when you respond in kind (e.g. by calling them out when they derail threads in the manner in which they accided you of) it makes it difficult to believe you have good intentions.
Having said that, if people are convinced you are a troll, I’d rather they stopped doing that work on your behalf.
Gotcha. Well I think that’s productive advice – in the future I will not respond to the portions of people’s responses where they make personal comments. As you point out, it can be tempting to respond, since some people assume you admit to whatever you don’t respond to, but I think you are right.
I support punching Nazis, but i don’t think you are a Nazi.
Us Nazis needs to stick together
Wrong message board - sorry
In before someone calls you a self-admitted nazi
@gman1225
I’ll momentarily try to be helpful. Please recognize the difference in these two statements:
As you have likely noted, your variation got a rather curt response.
Also:
I’d argue you can’t very well criticize the cultural orthodoxy here without being called that. People debate the politics all the time, with varying success and only occasional throwing of feces.
Consider, if you will, the theoretical idea of debating the merits of a political idea (net neutrality, foreign aid, military intervention, etc.) without ever mentioning a single politician or public figure. Not. One. You see, when a person expresses support for a politician or public figure (which is a bell nigh impossible to un-ring without significant passage of time), it’s extraordinarily difficult to pick and choose what aspects you do and don’t in any kind of a convincing way when facing people who oppose the person.
Most people see Trump as an embodiment of all he’s said and done. Considering the most visible aspect of government leadership is making public statements, what he says outweighs his actions in the mind’s eye of many. What’s more, grandiose and/or ridiculous statements inherently outweigh the mundane (think “squeaky wheel” statements when it comes to drawing attention).
So when someone who has stated support for a person connected to racists expresses concern over cultural integrity, it’s a really super-easy way to get whatever was said dismissed out of hand as the rantings of a fascist.
I hope the above is useful in the future, whether you stay or go.
I admit that this was funny.
Not even vaguely a strawman when you assign responsibility for all 300 posts to a single person. Which you’ve just done again.
How is gman responsible, for example. for Dave Perkins fatuous string of troll posts? Is the complete lack of facts, reason, or desire for an actual debate in those posts somehow also gman’s fault?
When Triggercut shits up a thread with about 50 rabbit pictures in one night, how is gman responsible?
When the string of people who are “ignoring” gman come by once or twice a day to broadcast that they are “ignoring” him - often by replying to one of his posts - could it be that they maybe share a teensy bit of the responsibility for shitting up threads like this?
“Look what he made us do” is the six year old’s defence.
I gotta admit I’m not a big fan of the heckler’s veto. Whenever I see a bunch of irrelevant jpgs in a thread, I feel good about feeding the troll.
I liked the bunnies, they were cute. Don’t be a bunny-hater, man.
Otters are superior.
But, yeah, it’s gotten tedious.