Drayke Newall Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 (edited) 2 hours ago, Jordan Whitt said: Omg you did NOT just call me Australian, did you??? Hey, what's wrong with being an Aussie 😢. We are so nice we still have a clause in our constitution to add you as part of Australia. 😜 Edited January 13, 2021 by Drayke Newall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scylla Rhiadra Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 4 hours ago, LittleMe Jewell said: He wants his SL Forums to be like Facebook and other social media -- where the only thing he sees are the things that he agrees with. They don't have those algorithms in place here, so he just blocks everyone that has a differing opinion. Keep questioning him on it and you'll join me and others on his block list. A few weeks ago, when someone noted here that it was his birthday, I made a very genuine attempt to reach out, and sent him a congratulatory IM in-world. According to his profile, he was online at the time. Unlike Garnet, I apparently didn't merit a "thank you," or even an acknowledgment. Based upon what he has said here and elsewhere, I've pretty much concluded that, were I to discover that I wasn't on his "list," I'd demand an explanation as to why i was not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Carling Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 15 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said: A few weeks ago, when someone noted here that it was his birthday Who Adamburp? Are you sure it was his birthday? He is known to start conversations with "happy birthday". Just for fun, no matter if the person he talks to has actually birthday. Often people return his birthday wishes, also just for fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnthonyJoanne Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 5 hours ago, Sukubia Scarmon said: I don't understand why, though. If this forum is such a bad place for you, that you do mute almost everyone, then why come if there's nothing to read for you but onsided scraps of conversations. That's like going to a restaurant just to sit there. Oo That's easy to explain. My blocklist is currently 3 pages. It's made up of the following groups: Racists and Bigots. Anyone who claims that any group is inherently X because of the color of their skin. Where X could be anything from 'criminal' to 'privileged'. I spent years discussing this bigotry with it's proponents on reddit, and not one of them ever acknowledged the countless ways their bias has been debunked or argued in good faith (see the next section). I gave up reddit as a result, and I have no desire to read the same hatred here. People who do not discuss in good faith. If someone has displayed a frequent tendency to mislead or misrepresent as a means of defending their position, then what they have to say isn't worth reading. This includes people who use all the fallacies (both formal and informal) ... I've no interest in bad faith arguments. Hypocrites. An excellent example is this: If someone is defending an action taken by one group, but condemning the same action taken by another group ... they are hypocrites and frankly I've had enough of their bias too. Now let me point out that (a) I don't block someone based on one post ... they need to be consistent in their asshattery and (b) unlike many I'm aware that there are such things a context and nuance and I take that into consideration before I decide someone needs to spend the rest of their existence in my bitbucket. And yes, that's a very solipsist point of view ... but it amuses me. And just to clarify - it's not always politics, philosophy or the like that gets a person ignored. There's one person on my ignore list that I never saw express a political opinion ... but they absolutely met the criteria for failing to argue in good faith. YMMV ... but, while this may sound elitist, I have spent more than enough of my time dealing with people who are full of hatred and/or full of manure and I no longer intend to waste my time in doing so. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scylla Rhiadra Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 (edited) 12 minutes ago, Doc Carling said: Who Adamburp? Are you sure it was his birthday? It was someone else who noted that it was his birthday. Perhaps it wasnt? Does that matter? Does receiving a greeting when it is not your birthday relieve you of the responsibility for basic courtesy? Adam has posted, what, three times in this thread. He has added nothing that is relevant to the OP or discussion: his sole point seems to have been to gratuitously insult a large portion of the posters here. He's even threatened to post the names of those he dislikes. Sorry, Doc. I'm not impressed. Edited January 13, 2021 by Scylla Rhiadra Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Carling Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 (edited) 46 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said: Sorry, Doc. I'm not impressed. It wasn't my inension to defend his doing. Just an info. We are both in a land companies support group. When people ask for help, he often jumps in and wishes them happy birthday. I guess he thinks that's funny. To avoid misunderstandings I'm not exactly a fan of him. Rather the opposite. Edited January 13, 2021 by Doc Carling 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Gregoire Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 (edited) 53 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said: Sorry, Doc. I'm not impressed. Doc is good people. I know him from the old Phoenix Lounge (the viewer) group. Cut him a little slack. This one: secondlife:///app/group/bbde14ba-cd49-9519-9826-03bcf2f008eb/about Edited January 13, 2021 by Selene Gregoire 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Carling Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 21 minutes ago, Selene Gregoire said: Doc is good people. Too kind, Selene. How are you doing? I hope you are ok. Well, sometimes I miss the group. But I heard it isn't the same anymore. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scylla Rhiadra Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 24 minutes ago, Selene Gregoire said: Doc is good people. I know him from the old Phoenix Lounge (the viewer) group. Cut him a little slack. I wasn't criticizing Doc at all, Selene. It's Adam who leaves me unimpressed. In fact, Doc and I are, together, a good example of people who can frequently disagree, as we have on a number of occasions on the Creation forum, and still get along pretty well. I don't think Doc would put me on ignore because we've butted heads sometimes, and I certainly wouldn't do that to him. Ignoring people with whom you disagree because you are too intellectually lazy to acknowledge and wrestle with different perspectives and views isn't Doc's way, nor mine. That would be Adam. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sukubia Scarmon Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 1 hour ago, AnthonyJoanne said: That's easy to explain. My blocklist is currently 3 pages. It's made up of the following groups: Racists and Bigots. Anyone who claims that any group is inherently X because of the color of their skin. Where X could be anything from 'criminal' to 'privileged'. I spent years discussing this bigotry with it's proponents on reddit, and not one of them ever acknowledged the countless ways their bias has been debunked or argued in good faith (see the next section). I gave up reddit as a result, and I have no desire to read the same hatred here. People who do not discuss in good faith. If someone has displayed a frequent tendency to mislead or misrepresent as a means of defending their position, then what they have to say isn't worth reading. This includes people who use all the fallacies (both formal and informal) ... I've no interest in bad faith arguments. Hypocrites. An excellent example is this: If someone is defending an action taken by one group, but condemning the same action taken by another group ... they are hypocrites and frankly I've had enough of their bias too. Now let me point out that (a) I don't block someone based on one post ... they need to be consistent in their asshattery and (b) unlike many I'm aware that there are such things a context and nuance and I take that into consideration before I decide someone needs to spend the rest of their existence in my bitbucket. And yes, that's a very solipsist point of view ... but it amuses me. And just to clarify - it's not always politics, philosophy or the like that gets a person ignored. There's one person on my ignore list that I never saw express a political opinion ... but they absolutely met the criteria for failing to argue in good faith. YMMV ... but, while this may sound elitist, I have spent more than enough of my time dealing with people who are full of hatred and/or full of manure and I no longer intend to waste my time in doing so. You missed the point, tho. You can ignore as many people as you wish, for whatever reason you like, you do not have to justify it at all. If you want to mute someone because their forumsavatar has the wrong color - go for it, it's your right to do so! I'm just puzzled why someone (not you) who seems to have 95% of the forum on ignore (That's a VERY wild guess :P), would chose to come here. It doesn't make sense to me, I find it odd. But that's about it. In the end, it's not my choice, nor do I want it to be. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Carling Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 (edited) 31 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said: In fact, Doc and I are, together, a good example of people who can frequently disagree, as we have on a number of occasions on the Creation forum, and still get along pretty well. Well put, Scylla. Actually I hardly block or ignore anyone. Isn't it a sign that one lacks of self-confidence? But that's perhaps a topic for an own thread. Edited January 13, 2021 by Doc Carling 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Carling Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 (edited) 2 hours ago, AnthonyJoanne said: I take that into consideration before I decide someone needs to spend the rest of their existence in my bitbucket Now there are all the avatars which were recently reported as missing. In your bitbucket. Just kidding. I know you meant the name of someone. Edited January 13, 2021 by Doc Carling 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnthonyJoanne Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 1 hour ago, Sukubia Scarmon said: I'm just puzzled why someone (not you) who seems to have 95% of the forum on ignore (That's a VERY wild guess :P), would chose to come here. It doesn't make sense to me, I find it odd. But that's about it. In the end, it's not my choice, nor do I want it to be. Ah - I follow. I was actually chatting with a friend in-world about this a bit earlier, and he made the point that he never pays any attention to the forums other than the technical ones ... scripting, that sort of thing. It makes sense. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orwar Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 5 hours ago, Vivienne Schell said: Science does not challenge 1+1=2. And if some people at so called "altenative" (ahem) websites claim that 1+1=3 in the headline, why bother to read the rest? Why should i have a dialogue with someone who either has no brain or is a cynic psycho? Of course science challenges 1 + 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna Nova Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 4 hours ago, AnthonyJoanne said: That's easy to explain. My blocklist is currently 3 pages. It's made up of the following groups: Racists and Bigots. Anyone who claims that any group is inherently X because of the color of their skin. Where X could be anything from 'criminal' to 'privileged'. I spent years discussing this bigotry with it's proponents on reddit, and not one of them ever acknowledged the countless ways their bias has been debunked or argued in good faith (see the next section). I gave up reddit as a result, and I have no desire to read the same hatred here. People who do not discuss in good faith. If someone has displayed a frequent tendency to mislead or misrepresent as a means of defending their position, then what they have to say isn't worth reading. This includes people who use all the fallacies (both formal and informal) ... I've no interest in bad faith arguments. Hypocrites. An excellent example is this: If someone is defending an action taken by one group, but condemning the same action taken by another group ... they are hypocrites and frankly I've had enough of their bias too. Now let me point out that (a) I don't block someone based on one post ... they need to be consistent in their asshattery and (b) unlike many I'm aware that there are such things a context and nuance and I take that into consideration before I decide someone needs to spend the rest of their existence in my bitbucket. And yes, that's a very solipsist point of view ... but it amuses me. And just to clarify - it's not always politics, philosophy or the like that gets a person ignored. There's one person on my ignore list that I never saw express a political opinion ... but they absolutely met the criteria for failing to argue in good faith. YMMV ... but, while this may sound elitist, I have spent more than enough of my time dealing with people who are full of hatred and/or full of manure and I no longer intend to waste my time in doing so. Please, pretty please, put me on your blocklist. (If I'm not already there, of course) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garnet Psaltery Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 (edited) 5 hours ago, Scylla Rhiadra said: A few weeks ago, when someone noted here that it was his birthday, I made a very genuine attempt to reach out, and sent him a congratulatory IM in-world. According to his profile, he was online at the time. Unlike Garnet, I apparently didn't merit a "thank you," or even an acknowledgment. Based upon what he has said here and elsewhere, I've pretty much concluded that, were I to discover that I wasn't on his "list," I'd demand an explanation as to why i was not. I remember the occasion. When I sent my greeting inworld it took quite a while before I got a response. I assumed he was busy, and it could be that he just he missed your IM or didn't get round to a response. Why not ask him? It's the second time you've pointed out that I got an acknowledgement and you didn't, and it feels as though I'm being accused of being popular; I don't actually believe that I am but it's an uncomfortable feeling being mentioned in this way. Edited January 13, 2021 by Garnet Psaltery Clarification. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arielle Popstar Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 6 hours ago, Vivienne Schell said: Science does not challenge 1+1=2. And if some people at so called "altenative" (ahem) websites claim that 1+1=3 in the headline, why bother to read the rest? Why should i have a dialogue with someone who either has no brain or is a cynic psycho? Because maybe you might learn something new. It is what you learn after you know it all that is important. When a readily available medicine has been proven to be able to flatten the covid 19 death curve, then there is something grossly wrong with your "science" when you continue to promote the idea that only an expensive and mostly unproven vaccine is the only salvation. 100,000's of thousands of unnecessary deaths because you don't like the political figure who first mentioned it. Yay you. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alwin Alcott Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 10 hours ago, LittleMe Jewell said: where the only thing he sees are the things that he agrees with. ..so he just blocks everyone that has a differing opinion. however less activ in blocking i do it too.. and not only to avoid to see the posts, but more the constant hacking, sucking, demonising, flaming( direct and indirect) to trigger responses that will deliver bans or suspensions. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Extrude Ragu Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 There just seems to be a lack of introspection. Many of the things that Trump and his supporters are being accused of, I just don't think are true and in fact I can name times when the accusers have done exactly what they accuse of. For example, Trump is accused of inciting people to commit acts of violence, but I watched his speech in its entirety on the day and I know I did not see any such call and recall him saying that we will march peacefully and patriotically. I can give you examples of violence being incited though:- Not inciting violence? Not encouraging terrorism? Not to mention the millions of calls for Trump and his supporters to be shot and put on lists. When the storming occurred and Trump made a video condemning it and asking his supporters to go home, Twitter deleted the video - Is this not an attempt at making sure that Trump supporters don't see the call for peace and trying to extend the violence for as long as they can? How about some of the news headlines from not too long ago, someone made a nice collage of these:- Not normalizing riots and violence? Really? You don't see the problem here? Either riots are OK or they're not, you don't get to have your cake and eat it. Personally I don't think they're OK and I condemn all the riots be it from Trump supporters and those from BLM, Antifa and all those other groups who's names seem to be in opposition to their actions and until the left does I don't think they can really speak from a moral high ground. As a British person it just astounds me the sort of tone-deafness that goes on over there. There is no self reflection, self discipline, an 'I can do no wrong' mentality. The reality is that both sides have plenty of people with flawed ideas and the only way you're ever going to restore calm is to meet each other in the middle. 7 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ted McGregor Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 (edited) 18 minutes ago, Extrude Ragu said: There is no self reflection, self discipline, an 'I can do no wrong' mentality. That is exactly what the POTUS is being, justified in my opinion, accused of as we speak. His political career is over. And I fully agree. I don't care if he commits political suicide : he should no longer pull others along with his intend to disrupt the outcome of the election which has been officially confirmed. All objections have been found dismissable by the Supreme Court. There is no presentable proof. He should relent and let go, like his followers. Edited January 13, 2021 by TDD123 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cinos Field Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 (edited) 13 minutes ago, Extrude Ragu said: How about some of the news headlines from not too long ago, someone made a nice collage of these:- Not normalizing riots and violence? Really? You don't see the problem here? Either riots are OK or they're not, you don't get to have your cake and eat it. Personally I don't think they're OK and I condemn all the riots be it from Trump supporters and those from BLM, Antifa and all those other groups who's names seem to be in opposition to their actions and until the left does I don't think they can really speak from a moral high ground. As a British person it just astounds me the sort of tone-deafness that goes on over there. There is no self reflection, self discipline, an 'I can do no wrong' mentality. The reality is that both sides have plenty of people with flawed ideas and the only way you're ever going to restore calm is to meet each other in the middle. Rioting against institutionalized murder is quite a bit different to rioting against democracy. That's something I've learned talking with Americans in general, but it's a little hard for us to really understand how quite a few of their police departments are. A lot of the BLM riots were sparked by police gunning down unarmed black men, or in at least one case, outright executing them after they were already incapacitated. That's the kind of stuff the summer's riots were against. Even if someone might disagree on if that's how those events went down (I don't, but in case you do) that's how they were *widely reported*. It's hard for us as Europeans to imagine, I know, because it doesn't happen here. But it's also why the BLM protests here fizzled out; there was nothing to really keep them going, because while we certainly have institutional racism, it's nowhere near the levels that fuel this in the US. The other side, in contrast, rioted because they didn't want to believe the results of an election even after it went to court, repeatedly, and got confirmed the same number of times. Edited January 13, 2021 by Cinos Field 4 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Extrude Ragu Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 5 minutes ago, Cinos Field said: Rioting against institutionalized murder is quite a bit different to rioting against democracy. I find this sentence to be intellectually dishonest. You paint it as good vs evil but the reality is not like that at all. 2 1 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ted McGregor Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 (edited) 5 minutes ago, Extrude Ragu said: I find this sentence to be intellectually dishonest. You paint it as good vs evil but the reality is not like that at all. Rioting against institutionalized murder : A march for awareness of people being killed by an organised system. Rioting against democracy ( electoral result ) : Obstruction of electoral acknowledgement confirmed in court. I agree with Cinos. Edited January 13, 2021 by TDD123 4 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Extrude Ragu Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 4 minutes ago, TDD123 said: Rioting against institutionalized murder .... Rioting against democracy ( electoral result ) : Obstruction of electoral acknowledgement confirmed in court. But again this is a dishonest viewpoint isn't it. You describe the left as fighting against an institutionally sponsored wrong, but describe the right as fighting an institution which can 'do no wrong'. 2 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ted McGregor Posted January 13, 2021 Share Posted January 13, 2021 2 minutes ago, Extrude Ragu said: But again this is a dishonest viewpoint isn't it. You describe the left as fighting against an institutionally sponsored wrong, but describe the right as fighting an institution which can 'do no wrong'. I never claimed one of both examples to be on either side of the policital spectrum. That is your doing. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Facebook
Instagram
Twitter
YouTube
Flickr
Recommended Posts
Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.