rigorousintuition.ca

I'm seeing again insinuations posted that members are "disinfo agents" because they happen to voice disagreement on certain wedge issues. When I see such remarks I will delete the posts without further comment.<br><br>I ask members to IM me with links when they see examples. <p></p><i></i>

To satisfy my curiousity, and if you don't mind saying, why do you object to that tactic?<br><br>-Sepka the Space Weasel <p></p><i></i>

Hi Jeff. I am embarrased to admit that I don't quite understand what a disinfo agent is, except as an insult. I understand that there could be groups posing as say, academics, deliberately lying for the sake of a political agenda. Is that what you mean? Thank you for being so patient with us, m. <p></p><i></i>

Short:<br>Any hostile disruptor whether pro or amateur posting on a discussion board to deceive, diffuse, or demoralize people on a hot topic.<br><br>See this long wiki definition. It is an education in info war and psy-ops in itself!<br><br>Knowing this stuff helps you to not shoot yourself in the foot or allow others to do it for you.<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_trolls">en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_trolls</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--> <p></p><i></i>

is that it's arguably the most effective tactic to short circuit debate, stymie critical thinking and frustrate movement-building.<br><br>A board like this requires, I think, <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>a willing suspension of suspicion of motive</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> in order to be a mentally healthy, intellectually satisfying and politically significant place. <br><br> <p></p><i></i>

Trolls are indeed heinous things, but I think calling someone a troll is probably not out of bounds. I've been called a troll before, and it wouldn't occur to me to ask that that post be deleted.<br><br> It's the insinuation that someone is doing so ON BEHALF of an outside agency in order to deceive well meaning truth seekers (Ohh...bad choice of term there) that is at issue, I think. <br><br>Anyway, I wish, Jeff, that you WOULD have further comment when you delete these posts. You can lock it, but I think it's good to explain exactly what it is you deleted. If folks can see that this is going to be enforced and what sorts of comments are clearly out of bounds, it will be more effective.<br><br><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>Edited due to misbehaving parenthesis</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=dreamsend@rigorousintuition>Dreams End</A> at: 3/10/06 3:09 pm<br></i>

Calling someone a disinfo agent usually means that you have lost the debate. At least that's my opinion. <!--EZCODE EMOTICON START :) --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/smile.gif ALT=":)"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> <p>--<br>CyberChrist<br>http://www.hackerjournal.org<br>My brain is hung like a horse.</p><i></i>

A board like this requires a willing suspension of suspicion of motive to be constructive?<br><br>Makes RI sound like a cult.<br><br>There are motives represented on this board, both witting and unwitting, and blinding oneself to them only increases confusion.<br><br>Come on Jeff, I know you could voice it better than that. <p></p><i></i>

I thought DE had left the building <p></p><i></i>

Forgot my wallet.<br><br><br>Actually,<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>I may post here and there, so this is no grand goodbye...but it's pretty sad what has happened here. Maybe qutb, gouda and the others can turn it back around.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br> <p></p><i></i>

Thanks for the wikipedia link. What an eye-opener. Imagine whole websites devoted to fine-tuning the art of being mean and rude. I didn't know whether to laugh or cry. What "movement" would RI be attempting to build, by the way? My assumption was it is a group of people with rather high standards for learning, trying to connect the dots and figure out how the world is working. Or not working. Or am I the last to find out? <p></p><i></i>

Interesting-<br>How on the day Jeff states his displeasure with labeling people as disinfos, a poster is exposed as a liar by another poster (with a curious rant blog)... who just happens to remember a mirror thread on another board from 6 months ago... and links to it.<br><br>(See the current "there's a girl" etc. thread)<br><br>sigh.<br><br>It seems like an attempt to discredit the validity of the RI board to me.<br><br>Hey, its ok. I know there's all kinds of... er, agendas and honey pots out there. But its a drag all the same... <p></p><i></i>

<br>But Jeff, what if someone really IS a disinfo agent? <br><br><br>If you ban such references, then effectively what you have done is open the door for them to flock in, set up camp and spread disinfo. Why not? They'll be in a protected area, just like a federal wildlife refuge. <br><br><br>And we won't be able to say anything about it, for we'll be shut out, while they remain as a protected species. If you ain't got 'em now, son, you soon will.<br><br><br>The label may be used indiscriminately and inconsistently, depending on who's using it. But! Those who come to this site expect it to be something of a jousting match, and there's going to be pointed disagreement, especially on what you described as "wedge" issues. <br><br><br>So if you come into the arena, you're gonna get nicked by someone's verbal sword once in a while. But this is a group of, dare I say, better than average discernment. Those who behave rudely will be seen for what they are. Their credibility will go down. It is part of their learning process, and observing this happen as part of group interaction is part of the learning process for the participants. <br><br><br>One more thing. This caught my eye:<br><br>"...movement-building."<br><br><br>We got a "movement" going here? More information, please. <br><br><br>Dragon<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <p></p><i></i>

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>But Jeff, what if someone really IS a disinfo agent?<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>An agent of <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>mis</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->information is arguably more harmful, since they usually <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>believe</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> the information they're sharing, and spread it willingly. You probably saw one of these agents in the mirror today.<br><br>The discovery of a genuine agent of <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>dis</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->information would be far more interesting, and I wouldn't be the first person to propose the idea of creating a "honeypot" for this, and other purposes. <p></p><i></i>

But Jeff, what if someone really IS a disinfo agent? <br><br><br>If you ban such references, then effectively what you have done is open the door for them to flock in, set up camp and spread disinfo. Why not? They'll be in a protected area, just like a federal wildlife refuge. <br><br>__________________________________________<br><br>I would really like to know the answer to that question as well. If we PM you with our suspicions, what are the mechanisms by which you could do something about it? COULD you do something about it? What are the consequences to that person if it is revealed that they are disinfo agents? How would you, Jeff, know for sure they ARE disinfo agents? <br><br>Isn't it better if we use our own discernment, based on an expansive history of this particular occupation of the PTB to disrupt discussions such as the ones we are having, to recognize such ones and call them on it? There are people on this board who seem unaccountably smitten with the official line on several issues, although they are very subtle and sophisticated Are we to suspend suspicion even when we strongly suspect infiltration by establishment shills, who are perfectly capable and willing, and indeed are trained to disrupt and discredit the knowledge we are attempting to gather here?<br><br>Just asking. <p></p><i></i>