Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics & Current Events' started by mongey, Mar 2, 2016.
The Left: The Group that Despises Hate
The Right: The Group That Loves Freedom.
Edited for: Content
Fuck it, it's not worth it.
Eh, I was warned once for my tone, and frankly I was probably over the line a little. But, for the most part, I'd say that that's attributable to two things - one, this board does lean center-left, and trolling (which is what most bans have been given for) is not a tactic you fall back on if you're in the majority. And two, I think there really does seem to be a correlation between people with a tendency to flame out in a discussion forum, and people with far right wing politics. Probably has a lot to do with the "I got mine, screw you guys" hard conservative attitude and with the growing xenophobia in the far right, that started to go more mainstream with the Tea Party.
But, again - I am 100% happy to have a political conversation with a conservative. If you're going to sit here and troll and post total bullshit and merely claim, "yeah, well I could totally believe it if it was true," then you really don't belong in this forum.
That said, if you have a problem with the moderation here, you're more than welcome to take it up with the moderators, I'm sure.
Eh, not trying to get involved in drama here at all but I wouldn't go that far.
There's a difference between snark and trolling- and I think Narad especially does a great job of delivering the quality snark that I crave while avoiding the kind of frustrating trolling I expect in other corners of the internet.
As someone who leans right, the constant condescension gets old, sure, but that's the price you pay for being in a predominantly left-wing space; you kind of have to expect that. It's the same (in reverse) in conservative spaces also. But I haven't seen much actual trolling here tbh.
^Well hey @Drew , if you want to meet in the middle, I've already said that the left has more good ideas than the right. As a matter of fact, the left is where I draw most of my own personal politics from. Again though, there are just things they do that rub me the wrong way that keep me wanting to associate myself as one. I'm pretty sure if I said what those things are, it would probably lead to disciplinary action more so than the one I'm probably already facing, so you'll excuse me if I'm a bit more limited than if I were talking shit about Conservatives.
I guess what constitutes snark to you is what trolling would be to me. Perspective I guess. Maybe I'm out of touch, who knows? I come from an era on a different website which anything outside of a pleasant conversation was considered trolling, so maybe things have changed a bit or maybe they've always been different here and I'm just an old man screaming at a cloud.
I think you're a pretty good example of someone who I don't agree with, sometimes quite strongly, but we can have pretty adult conversations about those differences, and that's fine.
I think there's a clear line between cutting sarcasm while having a discussion, and trolling. In the case of the former, you still believe the things you're saying, and care whether or not they're true or false. In the latter, you don't really care if what you're saying is correct, and in some cases you KNOW it isn't, you're just trying to stir the pot and rustle feathers. That's kind of the point I've been trying to make in the last day or two here - if you think liberals are ridiculous, that's your right... and god knows I think some of the things you see on the extreme left fringe are pretty asinine too... But don't tell me liberals are dumb because CNN thinks hacking is exactly like Fallout, and then when pressed admit that they don't, "....but it could be true!"
You really do describe your beliefs as center-left, which would technically make you a liberal. It's ok to be a liberal, and still think the extreme left is ridiculous, just as it's ok to be a conservative, and still disavow the extreme right's racism. Having a healthy dialogue within a party is important too.
You know what? Actually the way you put it... That does make sense. If that's what I am, then I guess that's what I am and I have no issue with that. Apologies for the generalizations, earlier.
That's all leftist; I don't see anything right wing in there.
There is a small group of people on the far left that behave that way, but they are entitled young kids and pretentious douches with no real life experience. They're not to be taken any more seriously, ideologically, than the far right neo-nazis*.
You're entitled to your feelings, but you haven't backed up your claims that the left is equivalent to the right, which is what people are commenting on.
I'm sure no one believes that. When these guys need to find a background image, they use stock photos and/or pre-existing footage due to the tight deadlines and copyright issues. I get that you don't like this, but it is the norm within the industry.
* Ideologically. Obviously, if their actions get out of hand and cause problems, that's a different situation.
I don't know, man, there's plenty of people on both sides willing to tell you what you should and shouldn't be saying. That's what I'm getting at. The way I tend to think is that if I'm catching shit from both sides, I automatically push myself from being associated with them. Maybe that's a flawed way of thinking, but I will concede that the right carries with it a fuckton more bullshit, not just personality-wise, but policy wise. I will say that I do have an issue of often depicting the worst of a group to judge them and yes, that's entirely on me, and something I need to work on. You know what they say though about assholes always being the loudest.
Of course it should be noted that when I'm referring to either party, I don't have the best people in mind from either side, I'm typically referring to the absolute dumbasses of which there are many.
I think it's helpful to separate the ideas from the people espousing them, especially when it comes to politics, because there are a ton of slimy ass hats in this field.
No, it's cool - that's one of the reasons we discuss things here.
In order to keep EXPLRR from posting a bunch of fake news, I think we'd all appreciate some big facts from everyone's favorite, most reliable, and unbiased source:
I'm not sure he'll have the rigor to contend with big facts.
Dude, I used to get warnings and bans all the time when OT was an especially big shitshow. Just learn to calibrate yourself and don't waste people's time. And maybe there's a snarky reply, but I hardly remember anytime when I'm being snarky but devoid of content.
You say the background image chosen doesn't depict hacking. I'm telling you it easily could -- that there are plenty of situations where a screen like that could depict something most people would describe as hacking. Say, you log into a computer and do some stuff with sensitive information in a file, delete it, and log out. When things are deleted they aren't usually actually deleted, but marked for deletion, and maybe you marked it for deletion, did a couple of other things, and those addresses are now partially over-written by new data, its existence as a file is lost. But, if you were to log in and peruse through the addresses you could make out some of that information. And unfortunately lots of passwords still wind up getting stored in plaintext. So yea...to me that screen looks like someone viewing address content that they don't have access to, i.e., "hacking" to many people.
But if I point that out to you, you seem to be unable to step back from this position? It's like, there's lots of examples of dumb stuff on the left. I don't think trying to enumerate dumb things is a useful discussion or one that would ultimately prove your point, but there are dumb things that almost everyone would agree are dumb. A news program using a totally relevant (well, apart from it actually being more phishing scrams) backdrop photo that happens to be from a video game is not one of them. You further extrapolating that people at CNN _believe_ this is how hacking is done, that they are portraying mis-information to liberals who eat it up, is where you've gone bonkers and no one can take you seriously. Who is this CNN person? You think they had an hour long meeting to discuss this? Called in an expert to go over what hacking is/isn't? And you care more about pictures than about the content of the reporting?
*IT IS A BACKGROUND IMAGE ON THE SCREEN FOR SECONDS*
I could tolerate infinite snark over anyone trying to pass this off as a coherent argument.
..... Soooooo how about that Buzzfeed story possibly being false?
See my post above.
@Explorer I know that if it were me, I’d be embarrassed to continuously espouse the virtues of my fact-based acumen, but clutching at straws from left-biased mouthpieces contradicts the integrity of your obsessive political hobby. Oh the irony.
That's why I've avoided this thread for so long is because I've always found it to be a circle jerk at times. I'll just leave it at that.
Just to note... even if Trump didn't order Cohen to lie, and yet allowed Cohen to lie to Congress, that is a violation of Trump's oath to faithfully execute the law. That's still an impeachable offense.
Trump knew the perjury was unlawful, as Trump and his attorneys have made party admissions to that effect.
That oath isn't from a left-based mouthpiece. Now, what is your fact-based argument against that violation of Trump's oath?
Incidentally, I appreciate that you seem ready to actually discuss something which is uncomfortable and inconvenient, even if you hadn't realized the further implications of Cohen's admissions and of Trump's statements regarding it. I'm glad to have had the chance to show how rigor works in this regard, while being ready to see how you apply it in this case.
Agreed on circle jerk but that's got nothing to do with the moderating. If you see a disproportionate amount of warnings given out to conservative viewpoints, it's because kamikazaing threads when you know you're in the minority is their preferred tactic.
The whole point of moderation is to maintain decorum and the absolute antihesis of that is going into a room and saying "you're all stupid". Members who actually engage individuals and ideas get by just fine. People who come in and carpet bomb entire threads do not. It's not rocket science.
Was stupid for MSM and the opposition party to jump on this story the way they did. I knew it was a "too good to be true" thing but we've had a long time since the last totally debunked story, so it was ripe to be overplayed. Hilarious that anyone would jump on a BuzzFeed story without any level of skepticsm though.
That said, there's been some developments since then regardless. Cohen lawyer not confirming or denying the content as well as BuzzFeed editors being adamant the story is 100% accurate, further bolstered by Giuliani doing the circuit to say "well even if he coached Cohen before his testimony, it wasn't illegal".
With all the extra noise going on, Buzzfeed getting the story wrong is similarly believable as, say, Mueller's office putting out that statement because they want more substance before they commit to it or they just want to leave the most incendiary stuff for the final report and not show their hand.