US Presidential Election 2020

[stickdog99]

[dada]

Nothing like a good youtube video screencap with no surrounding commentary. I take it that is Bill Gates in the flying illuminati eye contraption?

[stickdog99]

Nothing like a good youtube video screencap with no surrounding commentary. I take it that is Bill Gates in the flying illuminati eye contraption?

Nothing like another good dada meta-commentary.

[dada]

But I see people thinking about the billionaires all the time. Billionaires this, billionaire that, what are the elite billionaires up to now, I must know, all day and night, obsessively.

[Belligerent Savant]

.
Weak take.

You're selecting merely one of numerous factors in current subjugation attempts and painting an overly broad brush.

Troll-ish.

Do better. Or not.

[dada]

Not at all. Your society is obsessed with billionaires.

[dada]

Also, that's the second time you've insinuated that I'm trolling. In the general rules, it says "The charge or insinuation of "disinfo agent" can almost never be proven, and poisons and often ends meaningful discussion. Therefore suggesting a poster is purposefully spreading disinformation is not permitted"

I think suggesting that I'm trolling falls under the umbrella of suggesting I'm a disinfo agent. But rules or not, I feel like this has been discussed on the board before, and there was a general understanding that insinuating that fellow posters are trolling isn't acceptable here.

[stickdog99]

I don't think you are trolling. I think you are sincerely wondering

[dada]

Not you, stickdog, I was talking to belsav.

But now I'm wondering why you reposted the Simpsons image.

My, things down here in wonderland just seem to get curiouser and curiouser!

[JackRiddler]

Deescalate and stop doing the troll-type thing to each other. I don't want to judge and rule on these cases in detail, it's ridiculous. I just want you to stop denigrating with insinuations or cartoons or oblique but obvious meanness. You can instead disagree vigorously and condemn POVs you reject in words where that is so.

That's a request on emotional tone and not showing contempt. (Pointing out cases of my own hypocrisy wouldn't be a refutation by the way. We're all on the path to higher selves, one hopes.)

On the procedural side, yeah, it is good practice and should be self-evident that one includes explanations in one's own words of why one is posting given outside media, especially videos, if not proper summaries or previews of what is in them. (On this I must say I have a marginally better record, myself. Archive threads are fine when there's curation and comment to go with them, and when thread proliferation is avoided.)

It doesn't take much meme posting to give a hit-and-run feel, especially when it spreads to multiple threads.

Also, is there really a need to post the complete works of one's favored bloggers or POV merchants in full every time they post anything at all, again generally without comment, as if these constitute holy writ? And worse, letting these uncommented items serve as a kind of insinuation to replace discussion and argument? You may remember this kind of thing made fights for years, because some were doing it to an extreme (daily on every live thread, and starting new threads daily or near-daily on the same stuff, and thus flooding the board to the exclusion of all other material). At least it isn't the case here and now. But if you remember that, recall also how annoying you found it.

Thanks.

.

[JackRiddler]

.

The desire to condemn, topple, expropriate, and probably behead (as a matter of human self-defense) members of the billionaire and capitalist-state ruling classes is obviously a near-point of universal consensus around here.

What does this not mean, however?

1. First, it does not mean that every claim made about given members of these classes is true. Some of these claims, in fact, are lies, or at least demonstrably untrue, or (in many cases) intentionally outlandish and insane-sounding. Some of these untruths, thus, SERVE THE FUCKING BILLIONAIRES by poison-pilling all other truthful news about them. Thus it is possible to say horrible things about Gates, or Soros, or whomever, that may make you feel good, but that not only are untrue or mistaken, but also make you into their unwitting de-facto PR assistant. (It's kind of sad after 20 years of this board, where this process has always been widely understood, how often it still has to be repeated.)

2. Second, it definitively does not mean that contesting the truth about false claims about the billionaires or other baddies (many of which may be intentional poison-pill disinfo) makes the one who contests claims he finds false into a defender of the billionaires, or a blanket denier of other negative claims about them. l

So please stop pretending that is so and attacking people on that basis. It's the lowest-common-denominator of binary political thinking, deploying the same logic as all the Red-Blue/D-R/lib-con/pro v anti Trump dichotomies we all despise.

.

[Belligerent Savant]

.

Agreed - but that's not what happened above, tho.

My larger point was about aloof misframing of talking points in an ostensible attempt to go meta.

[dada]

Now you're just searching for a way to insinuate that I'm trolling, without actually saying it.

[Belligerent Savant]

.

Oh, I believe I was quite forward about it. There are times your output mimics troll-like behavior, but the same can be said for just about any regular here, including myself of course. A few at higher frequencies than others.

[stickdog99]

Is it still OK to want to fight against our would be totalitarian leaders? Is it OK if I prefer not to empathize with our would be totalitarian leaders as hapless pawns playing their "necessary" role in larger drama beyond their control?

Just wondering ...