If I readily admit I don’t know what I’m talking about, that’s usually an indication to show me what you mean, not that I still want to argue, right?
Read the post of yours that I responded to initially.
To quote Triumph:
“I keed, I keed!”
Hmm, I wonder who those are?
Then don’t do so. State your case and politely excuse yourself if you just can’t get through. Give your audience the benefit of the doubt and assume that they’re intelligent enough to understand the validity of your viewpoint over his. It might be frustrating, but it’s more productive than getting into a flame war.
I gave you a link to everything Hoppe has written besides the one book basically. You again did what you did in the other thread, “Ew, me no likey!” and proceed to say he advocates slavery. I have criticisms of Hoppe, Mises, Rothbard, etc. but if I want to make them I will at least be able to back them up with something. Whatever, it is apparent that nothing is going to be done with this. I am sick of wasting my time on you. I will just start reporting the posts.
Also, Lilburne, I really don’t know where I have crossed the line when the lines aren’t clear. I posted a picture off the internet of the guy who says it is okay to rape and murder infants. I probably lost my cool a few times when nothing is done about trolls like here again.
I know. My willpower isn’t so strong and some people genuinely derail threads. I just hope some other regs will ignore the trolls as well.
Hey man, you quoted those passages, not me. That was just what I took from them. I’m sorry we disagree, but it’s no reason to ban me.
I’m sorry that you enjoy talking about people’s ideas and refuse to read their works. Terrorists win OK?
All I need now is confirmation that there is no rule about going off topic and that I can say whatever nonsense I want as long as it isn’t a personal attack.
have I reached the right website? I’m looking for nazigermany.com or soivietrussia.com
See, if we had that feature, we could have a discussion about Spencer without JLR’s opinions on books he didn’t read. I just want to know if going off topic is a rule here or not. If not, I am ready to blog about my homemade ricotta pizza I had for dinner in the Spencer thread too. I am not suggesting a RevLeft ghetto for everyone who disagrees. I am suggesting you ban people who still can’t make a coherent argument after 1000+ posts and constantly derails threads.
You’re complaining about two different things as if they were the same.
You’re last sentence deals with the “coherent argument” issue. Again, the “moderating invalid argumentation” is a non-starter, because it lends itself to readily to abuse.
What you said before that pertains to the “off topic” issue. Yes, we should all strive to remain on-topic, and if people derail threads consistently (like when Poptech would use every thread as a soapbox from which to denounce anarchism), then some moderation is called for.
But here’s what happened in the Social Darwinism thread.
The OP mentioned Herbert Spencer, and not Hoppe.
LaRose then offered a basically on-topic reply, and ended it with a dig against Hoppeans. The dig was a tad rude, and likely ill-informed, but it was still basically on-topic, because it was comparing what LaRose thinks Hoppeans do with what he thinks social darwinists do. Not a big deal.
ERO thought the comparison was ill-founded and ill-informed, so he objected. Also not a big deal.
It was at that point that the argument should have moved on to a new thread. But it didn’t. Both sides were too lazy to start a new thread so the focus on Spencer could have been maintained in the original thread.
Yet, while LaRose has recognized that he sometimes goes over the line in his frequently gadfly-like style, ERO would have us believe that he had nothing to do with derailing that thread.
I don’t see what is wrong with slapping people for repeated elliptical arguments and fallacies. I know how to identify them.
Anyhow, yeah I helped derail the thread anticipating nothing to be done about the plague he carries with him. Expect more reports if I don’t just reduce my posting level drastically.
“Nihilist”… what more do you need to know?
Not much.
Don’t waste your breathe is my advice.
TBH I agree that the quality of posts over the past 6 months have degraded substantially.
It would be great if we could star rate posters. Then filter out posters who get an overall low score or something. But I know thats a feature we wouldn’t likely get.
If you notice the bottom “trash” part of my sig, it’s referring specifically to the kind of garbage ERO is talking about. It’s not just Jackson and his often antagonistic tone, but there are several others. 2 years ago, in my opinion, this forum was the internet’s pinnacle for discussing intellectual thought. I know it’s a cocky, naive, statement, but there are people on this forum whom I am proud and feel privileged of the opportunity to discuss with them. I could name a dozen off the top of my head, some are still here, some have left. When I came here originally my brain was a spongue, overwhelmed by the amount of information coming my way. It has since slown down drastically and I have been forced to look elsewhere to assist my learning.(Which is probably a good thing)
Now days I no longer get the feedback from these forums I used to. It used to be that I would have a new discovery every day, or every other. Now it’s weeks before I chew on something of interest. Instead I find myself sifting through petty rants, arguments, and disputes. And I reluctantly admit that I have been sucked into some of those petty debates. I cannot decide if whether it’s the recent overall quality of posts that I find lacking, or perhaps I have simply learned that much.(The latter I doubt, as I have many questions still)
I mean we went from intellectual pinnacle, to nihilistic, legal positive, baby raping, troll rants. Or even discussions whos premise I agree with but tactics I find petty, circular, or antagonistic. My Father(I know roll the eyes) always said that negativity breads negativity, and I feel that there has been much breading going on these forums as of late. I cannot speak for LS but I often feel that there is a reason why he chooses not to participate here any longer. At any rate, even with my motivation to share my knowledge back with newer members I am deterred from posting in fear rampant petty retaliations or long winded and illogically circular debates. I don’t have the energy to argue 10 pages with someone who thinks codes of conducts don’t exist, especially when the topic is about something entirely different.
Any how thats my 2c and it felt good to vent. Still I think a poster rating system would be great. I doubt this forum software could support something like that though. Any how, bout time to take out the trash eh?
I find it odd that people would complain about certain posters and yet frequently engage them anyway. There’s no reason you can’t just scroll past the post(er)s you don’t find worth your time. If you found them worthless, other discerning folks probably will as well. Not every little thing warrants an answer. But maybe that solution is just too obvious to see.
The worry seems to be that some wayward posts will give the wrong impression to outsiders, hence need to be ATTACKED…as if there were ever a forum in the history of the Internet where attacking a perceived troll made them post less instead of more.
Well my issue specifically is when that certain poster re-directs the discussion away from the questions or comments of productive/insightful posters. Usually via trolling or just in general being overwhelming.
In those cases a good thread was started, a new person signed up on the forums and was genuinly interested about AE. Someone like WIlderness or Nir would post something insightful, and then the troll comes up and overwhelms the thread with posts. What happens in this case is it re-directs the new member to respond to the troll, not to people offering actuall good information.
This is the result
-
Deterrs new members away
-
Deterrs existing members from posting on genuinely good questions
I can link examples if you like?
And besides, even if I, or others, do engage these “certain” people. It’s besides the point that they are trollish in nature, even if we don’t respond to them someone will and often times it’s a newly joined member who doesn’t know better. Even some very prominent members here cannot defend their own judgements in a positive/productive way once they realize that their argument is circular they instead get nasty.
Thank you for trying to defend me filc. I am completely pissed right now. It is beyond me how anyone could read the thread, see him make wild claims and taunt me by asking for a substantive post from me when the question was to him, then have the nerve to come here and act like I am just being emo.
If that is the concern, a quick note to the new member that the poster in question does not represent the views of the LvMI or prevailing views on the forums should be sufficient - surely such posters would even agree.
Doesn’t work that way my friend, and I have to think you have seen some of the threads I have in mind. All of that stuff is tried, nearly every time. Troll’s don’t go away, and people don’t stop responding to them. There is a thread going on right now that is a testament to that. [:)]