The goal here isn't to pat each other's backs, but it certainly isn't to toss feces at people to watch how they run around.
Trolling is posting something in a disingenuous or confrontational manner solely to get negative reactions. If your point isn't to present a legitimate point for rational debate, then you're breaking the rules of the community.
I see here examples like this (http://community.livejournal.com/politicartoons/1591949.html?thread=33975437#t33975437) way too often. Non-liberal cartoons are met here with pointless insults, endless ad hominem attacks, and several community members, in fact, almost never offer anything more substantial than another "derp derp" (http://community.livejournal.com/politicartoons/1594034.html?thread=34012594#t34012594). You can be sure you'll get some comments like this if you post conservative cartoon.
I mean I'm not sure everybody here understands what the goal here is the same way you do.
There is a huge amount of community difference between saying "Derp Derp", and saying "Obama is re-instituting slavery". Do you agree?
Quite simply, many of the non-liberal cartoons that have been posted as of late have been setting off the troll-o-meter pretty heavy. I've been hoping that people would simply stop taking the bait, but it appears I'm going to have to be a bit more active since people are willing to admit they are trolling in the comments.
You are welcome to post "Derp Derp" to any left-wing nonsense that comes onto your screen, but if people keep making entire posts to use some trigger issue in a disingenuous manner to illicit response for your entertainment, then I'm going to start taking action.
There is a huge amount of community difference between saying "Derp Derp", and saying "Obama is re-instituting slavery". Do you agree?
Yes, I do. There is a difference. First statement is controversial, but deserves discussion. What Obama is doing is not re-instituting slavery, of course, but there is some trend to limit people freedom, as usual during the government expansion periods, and this cartoon reminds about that in a way, traditonal for this genre. It's a legitimate thing. "Derp Derp", on the other hand, doesn't contain anything. The only thing the comment like this can demonstrate is that commenter is too stupid to find better arguments.
That's why I have to decline your invitation to post "derp derp" comments. I prefer to express myself on a different level, although I have to admit that I was tempted to do something like this several times.
Hope you will not be biased in being a bit more active. I kind of voted for you.
If someone posted "War for Oil" cartoons every day for three months, then I can bet the right-wing DERP DERP replies would only be challenged by the vast number of WAAARGHARBL macros. I think that the partisanship of the replies cannot be separated from the partisanship of the posts themselves. At some point, the inanity of particular partisan points must either face legitimate critique or end up being ridiculed for being oblivious.
When I was a kid, I read one of my mom's books, "I'm OK, You're OK." The basic premise is simple, if you talk to people in a condescending manner, you should be surprised when you get replies that seem snotty and immature. When you talk to people like a victim, you shouldn't be surprised when people get parental. None of this justifies the tone of the responses, but the negative replies do not justify the tone of the original interaction.
I hold posts to the community to a higher standard than I hold replies to individual posts. How we begin our conversation is just as important as how we continue it.
What Obama is doing is not re-instituting slavery, of course, but there is some trend to limit people freedom, as usual during the government expansion periods...
Then why weren't you and yours complaining along with the libruls during the Bush years? That's why it's disingenuous, because you're only making a stink now that it's not your guys in control.
Who says we weren't? Why do you think Bush had such a miserable rating? He lost a significant of his base, including me, btw. For a slightly different reasons, though, because he didn't expand government that far. His only thing about freedom was Patriot Act, it was totally bipartisan, and Obama doesn't seem willing to limit it seriously.
The Americans that were enslaved during the history of this country were forced in chains over to this country in a terrible journey during which many of them died, stripped naked, paraded in front of potential buyers, examined like animals. When they were bought, they were OWNED and they couldn't make any decisions about their own life and future. They didn't even HAVE any income to tax. They broke their backs in labor so that other people could do well. They were whipped, raped, beaten, had pieces of their bodies cut off, bred like animals, broken up from their families, sold onto unfamiliar farms. If they ran away, they were captured and punished. And they had no hope or promise of anything different happening until the mid-1800s.
No American today has to face even a fraction of that kind of generational terror and despair. It's simply not a legitimate comparison at all.
That's all pretty sad, but I still don't see why one can't compare different levels of limitations of freedom, especially in the form of political cartoon. I'd like to hear rational explanation, not emotional.
I could count on one hand the number of non-lather posts that have been met with that level of derision. As I said way back, he's free to post, and we're free to hold his every word in contempt based on what he's said before.
I have never dismissed what you have written out of hand. Maybe rough, but I explained myself, and I paid attention to what you had to say. With lather, I came to see that was a waste of time. Hence : "derp" for lather.
I have tried to engage you as well, but ran into a wall when I realized that no source I offered was ever legitimate enough for you. If there can never be a common perception between two people, then there can never be a civil discussion. So I just stopped replying.
After you run off the sane ones, all you have left are the crazies.
Frankly, I don't remember what we were discussing. Some topics indeed have no legitimate sources from my point of view. At least, I haven't seen them so far.
After you run off the sane ones, all you have left are the crazies.
This is very true. Can be observed in any echo chamber.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png)
i.livejournal.com) wrote in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
politicartoons2009-10-06 05:39 am
no subject
Trolling is posting something in a disingenuous or confrontational manner solely to get negative reactions. If your point isn't to present a legitimate point for rational debate, then you're breaking the rules of the community.
no subject
I mean I'm not sure everybody here understands what the goal here is the same way you do.
no subject
Quite simply, many of the non-liberal cartoons that have been posted as of late have been setting off the troll-o-meter pretty heavy. I've been hoping that people would simply stop taking the bait, but it appears I'm going to have to be a bit more active since people are willing to admit they are trolling in the comments.
You are welcome to post "Derp Derp" to any left-wing nonsense that comes onto your screen, but if people keep making entire posts to use some trigger issue in a disingenuous manner to illicit response for your entertainment, then I'm going to start taking action.
no subject
Yes, I do. There is a difference. First statement is controversial, but deserves discussion. What Obama is doing is not re-instituting slavery, of course, but there is some trend to limit people freedom, as usual during the government expansion periods, and this cartoon reminds about that in a way, traditonal for this genre. It's a legitimate thing. "Derp Derp", on the other hand, doesn't contain anything. The only thing the comment like this can demonstrate is that commenter is too stupid to find better arguments.
That's why I have to decline your invitation to post "derp derp" comments. I prefer to express myself on a different level, although I have to admit that I was tempted to do something like this several times.
Hope you will not be biased in being a bit more active. I kind of voted for you.
no subject
When I was a kid, I read one of my mom's books, "I'm OK, You're OK." The basic premise is simple, if you talk to people in a condescending manner, you should be surprised when you get replies that seem snotty and immature. When you talk to people like a victim, you shouldn't be surprised when people get parental. None of this justifies the tone of the responses, but the negative replies do not justify the tone of the original interaction.
I hold posts to the community to a higher standard than I hold replies to individual posts. How we begin our conversation is just as important as how we continue it.
no subject
Then why weren't you and yours complaining along with the libruls during the Bush years? That's why it's disingenuous, because you're only making a stink now that it's not your guys in control.
no subject
no subject
no subject
(no subject)
no subject
no subject
no subject
No American today has to face even a fraction of that kind of generational terror and despair. It's simply not a legitimate comparison at all.
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
I could count on one hand the number of non-lather posts that have been met with that level of derision. As I said way back, he's free to post, and we're free to hold his every word in contempt based on what he's said before.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
After you run off the sane ones, all you have left are the crazies.
no subject
After you run off the sane ones, all you have left are the crazies.
This is very true. Can be observed in any echo chamber.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
You're right
Re: You're right