User Tag List

View Poll Results: Does feeling intimidated by certain posters limit your participation in threads?

Voters
81. You may not vote on this poll
  • Never

    48 59.26%
  • Sometimes

    30 37.04%
  • Always

    3 3.70%
First 162425262728 Last

Results 251 to 260 of 299

  1. #251
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,529

    Warm Fish and Chips

    I think when I first joined Central like many I was looking to make contact with others. But after a while I realised that I use Central like I use the newspaper.

    I don't use the newspaper to make contact with others - rather I wrap myself every morning in the newspaper like warm fish and chips.

    And just as the newspaper is not about individual contact, so Central is not about individual contact. Rather it is like getting into a warm bath - it is soothing, it cocoons us, it embraces us as warm water embraces us in the bath.

    But when we misuse Central for personal contact, naturally Central becomes scratchy, distempered, even disillusioning.

    And rather than enjoying bathing together on Central, we degenerate into personal insults which may lead to banning.

    And in fruitlessly trying to make personal contact, we engage in rational debate, the best of us trying to find common ground and the worst to win.

    But every day we go to Central, like the Romans went to the communal Baths, for tactile comfort. We wrap ourselves in Central as we wrap our selves in the newspaper like warm fish and chips.

  2. #252
    Senior Member King sns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    enfp
    Enneagram
    6w7 sp/sx
    Socionics
    IEE
    Posts
    6,748

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Salomé View Post
    You're fucking kidding me, right?

    Now that's just plain unpleasant!!

    Honestly, I don't give a flying fuck. If people throw stones, they need to make sure they have a pretty robust boulder shield in place, instead of crying about it when fire is returned. IOW, if you can't take the heat, stay out of the fucking kitchen.

    Jesus, what a bunch of wimps.
    Yeah. I am a wimp. I spend a lot of time trying not to talk to *certain* people actually. But *golly*

    Tell me more about what it's like to have a *robust boulder shield* in place. I've never been able to provide such a thing.
    06/13 10:51:03 five sounds: you!!!
    06/13 10:51:08 shortnsweet: no you!!
    06/13 10:51:12 shortnsweet: go do your things and my things too!
    06/13 10:51:23 five sounds: oh hell naw
    06/13 10:51:55 shortnsweet: !!!!
    06/13 10:51:57 shortnsweet: (cries)
    06/13 10:52:19 RiftsWRX: You two are like furbies stuck in a shoe box

    My Nohari
    My Johari
    by sns.

  3. #253
    Senior Member King sns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    enfp
    Enneagram
    6w7 sp/sx
    Socionics
    IEE
    Posts
    6,748

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    Fixed.
    Quote Originally Posted by Salomé View Post

    Fixed.
    Fixed.
    06/13 10:51:03 five sounds: you!!!
    06/13 10:51:08 shortnsweet: no you!!
    06/13 10:51:12 shortnsweet: go do your things and my things too!
    06/13 10:51:23 five sounds: oh hell naw
    06/13 10:51:55 shortnsweet: !!!!
    06/13 10:51:57 shortnsweet: (cries)
    06/13 10:52:19 RiftsWRX: You two are like furbies stuck in a shoe box

    My Nohari
    My Johari
    by sns.

  4. #254
    Senior Member King sns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    enfp
    Enneagram
    6w7 sp/sx
    Socionics
    IEE
    Posts
    6,748

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post
    I think when I first joined Central like many I was looking to make contact with others. But after a while I realised that I use Central like I use the newspaper.

    I don't use the newspaper to make contact with others - rather I wrap myself every morning in the newspaper like warm fish and chips.

    And just as the newspaper is not about individual contact, so Central is not about individual contact. Rather it is like getting into a warm bath - it is soothing, it cocoons us, it embraces us as warm water embraces us in the bath.

    But when we misuse Central for personal contact, naturally Central becomes scratchy, distempered, even disillusioning.

    And rather than enjoying bathing together on Central, we degenerate into personal insults which may lead to banning.

    And in fruitlessly trying to make personal contact, we engage in rational debate, the best of us trying to find common ground and the worst to win.

    But every day we go to Central, like the Romans went to the communal Baths, for tactile comfort. We wrap ourselves in Central as we wrap our selves in the newspaper like warm fish and chips.
    maybe we can all agree on certain adjectives for this post?
    06/13 10:51:03 five sounds: you!!!
    06/13 10:51:08 shortnsweet: no you!!
    06/13 10:51:12 shortnsweet: go do your things and my things too!
    06/13 10:51:23 five sounds: oh hell naw
    06/13 10:51:55 shortnsweet: !!!!
    06/13 10:51:57 shortnsweet: (cries)
    06/13 10:52:19 RiftsWRX: You two are like furbies stuck in a shoe box

    My Nohari
    My Johari
    by sns.

  5. #255

    Default

    Not really. To draw in information on a idea I know little about to argue a point that doesn't mean too much to me is taxing, so I avoid posting against those that tend to draw things out beyond a few posts back and forth. Usually someone does all the dirty work and the thread comes to a point where everything is resolved. (At least in my mind.) If it isn't then I will post to ask a question here or there.
    Dirt Farmer

  6. #256
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,529
    Quote Originally Posted by shortnsweet View Post
    maybe we can all agree on certain adjectives for this post?
    If they are pejorative, we are intimidated.
    And if they are positive, we understand.

  7. #257
    Senior Member Keps Mnemnosyne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    Mm
    Posts
    400

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Salomé View Post
    I draw a lot of fire because I make strong statements, and I don't back down.
    Very true, and something very admirable.
    But I don't simply dismiss the viewpoints of others. If that were the case, I wouldn't have bothered starting this thread. I acknowledge good points when I see them, even if I find the poster to be personally obnoxious or antagonistic towards me. I am impartial in this regard (which is rare, on this forum). I don't make a habit of back-slapping or cabal-building though - those are the tactics of people with no confidence in their own opinions or abilities. An argument should stand or fall entirely on its own merits.
    Obviously, there will be differences on what a good post is, but I do distrust when people speak of impartiality as I think it is an ideal concept ultimately unachievable by humans. We do have egos, even if we try to control them and we do have an unfortunate aspect of letting our views influence our opinions of logic of others. That said, you may argue that you are truly impartial and of course I am not you and will admit to being biased by my own view of the human condition. Unfortunately, we will probably never agree on this and as it is a basic value, hard to prove or disprove, is something I should just accept.

    You know what I find dismissive? When people tell me I'm asking the WRONG question.
    Just because it isn't the question YOU want me to ask, doesn't make it the "wrong" one. There's no such thing as a "wrong question", only incorrect answers. (To label a question "wrong" is simply Fe-heavy bias / arrogance attempting to suppress independent thought). If people could just figure this out, they might be able to avoid being so reactionary and petty.
    When I said wrong question, I meant wrong question in regards to what information you seek, I thought the reason why you made this thread was to
    Z would have us believe that forum users are effectively gagged by their fear of people like @andante and myself.

    I want to find out if this is true.
    Which seemed to me (subjective, I know) an unusual method of doing it, as people who are truly intimidated by you are the ones least likely to respond and that the people who have responded seem to have stated that is not the central issue. However it was presumptuous of me to suggest that your purposes would be better served with a different question as I apparently presumed your motives for this thread incorrectly.
    Also Maybe ask their own questions? Or, I dunno, think outside the box a little and use the question as a launching pad to explore other ideas.
    That being said, if you are still willing to converse with me and answer questions, I would like to ask: Why did you start this thread, what did you expect from it, and what information do you ?hope? to gather from this thread?


    Just because a post isn't responded to, doesn't mean it's ignored. Good quality posts don't always need anything added to them. Unless you're one of the people who like to see a screen full of +1s and other content-free validation?
    I agree, good posts do not need anything added to them. I had been more talking about when posts raise questions in a thread and are just left unanswered. Content-free posts, validation or insulting, are something I do not like in serious debates and is the reason I posted before.
    The controversial posters are almost always NTs and we will only focus on those posts that require challenging/clarification. This shouldn't be percieved as a sleight.
    Agreed.

    Although I now understand your reason for insulting me.
    I am sorry if I insulted you, it was not my intention. Nor should that be an excuse, so I am and will try harder to not be offensive. I have no clue what percieved reason you are referring to. If you are trying to say that a post of mine was ignored by you, my only post in a contentious thread in the past six months was
    Quote Originally Posted by Keps Mnemnosyne View Post
    ...
    which was meant as a humorous post aimed at a particular member's concerns and was recognized by the one aimed at and was not expected to have been read by others. If you are not talking about that post, I have no idea what you meant. Could you clarify?
    Love wouldn't exist without loneliness to inspire it.

    Peach yogurt is made of love. And gnome kidneys. - Domino

    I can cope and will cope without polluting my lungs. - Saslou

  8. #258
    meh Salomé's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    10,540

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    I can't be making an "argument from ignorance" concerning the accusations in the troll post, because I am not making an argument about them at all. I am simply pointing out a question that deserves examination. It might be a defensible position to claim that all posts that appear to be trolling should be dismissed out of hand, but so far you have not made that claim, much less attempted to defend it.

    When I encounter a subject about which it is clear you have greater knowledge, I will certainly defer to it.
    Oh goody, a challenge!

    Prepare to defer, honey.

    You know, it doesn't take a genius to figure it out, but since you clearly have problems understanding the blindingly obvious, imma help you out.

    Your initial question was "do we shoot the messenger?" just because he's "obviously" a sock created exclusively for the purposes of trolling / circumventing a ban. (I see you're not completely stupid by realising this, so it's possible that my investment in showing you what you cannot figure out for yourself, will not be a waste of time. We'll see.)

    I think what you meant to say was more along the lines of "do we throw the baby out with the bath water?". But nevermind, saying what you mean isn't your strong suit. This much we know. Fortunately, unlike you, I'm pretty good at understanding what people mean even when their mouths trip them up with all sorts of interesting tongue slips.

    For you to ask that question, means you must think every troll post attacking someone on this forum deserves to be checked for veracity, rather than dismissed out of hand. This despite forum rules stating that personal attacks will not be tolerated. (Yes, we know the mods only follow this rule when it suits them, but that's another thread).

    A strange stance to take, I mean, I could make a whole bunch of unpleasant random speculations about you (about, your weight, say?) and post them in the next thread you start. I wouldn't, because I'm above such childish idiocy, but since you're obviously not, just think for a while about how much you'd appreciate that and get back to us about whether that's the kind of environment you want to participate in, 'cos I'm sure someone will be happy to oblige you.

    Moving on, you have said both that the post deserves such attention / scrutiny, (presumably because you're such a big fan of ad hominem attacks along with all the other reasoning errors you routinely make ) but also that there's no way to check the veracity of the claims. I'm getting a bit bored pointing out the obvious to you so I'll let you join the dots on that one.

    Let's ignore the truth and assume that the post does deserve attention. Is there really any way of checking it's truthiness?
    Well now, let's see.
    First claim.
    Reviewing your history you seem to have set up a thread to tackle the same topic you always post: namely something to do with male/female interaction/harassment/rape etc.
    Creepy, intimidated, lurker dude has read my entire posting history, apparently. All 8000+ posts! In less than a month! (Now that's what I call dedication/obsession.)

    However, he obviously doesn't read very well since he seems to think this thread is about something other than it is. Not unsurprising maybe, since it was his girlfriend who first brought up the topic of sexual harassment in this thread, so he might be excused for paying more than unusual attention to that.

    Now that we've disproved that first claim, what about the other? Easy to check? Certainly. Anyone is free to browse my history and see for themselves whether I "always" post about "male/female interaction" "harassment" and "rape". (Which, if it were true, would apparently be a very bad thing indeed). In truth, I can't remember a rape thread that wasn't started by an INTx man, I certainly know I've never started one. In fact, I don't start many threads on this board, because people rarely engage with the topics that interest me. Threads touching on gender issues and sexuality do get a lot more attention than other types of threads, but I think this reflects the board obsessions, more than my own.
    Easy to prove this claim false then. Even if it were remotely fucking relevant to anything.

    The fact you have been discussing the same topic since you have join in September 2008 non-stop (with small breaks) could be countenanced as harassing an entire sex.
    First of all, I am away from this forum for months at a time, almost all of last year, which you can see from my posting history. (And almost always regret it when I return). Second, in what way would this preoccupation, were it to exist, "countenance" (fuckwit for "constitute") "harassment of an entire sex"? And which sex, exactly? How would talking about rape, even if it were a preoccupation (as it seems to be for his buddy), constitute harassing an entire sex? Unless you think all men are rapists, or all women want to be raped... Oh wait, where have I heard that before?
    Confused troll is clearly confused.

    Have you seen a psychologist regarding your fetish?
    Hmm, so now it's something that turns me on sexually? Pretty sure he meant to say "obsession", but maybe he just wanted to tell us something about his own perversions? (I.e. sexual harassment gets him off. Maybe that's why he pursues vulnerable women who don't report that kind of thing?). Who can say? Like you, precision in language or argument is not a strength. But he's INTJ, so no surprises that you both exhibit similar cognitive dysfunction.
    I am concerned you may not neccessarily have a clear mind regarding the topic and be self sabotaging your own future happiness.
    Now, call me a cynic, but I don't think my happiness keeps him up nights... Then again. Lol.

    On the other hand you keep referring to 'Z'; did you really set up this entire thread to bait a single user who disagreed with your posting elsewhere? I guess you are not just intimidating other users; you are using the dual nature of the discussion in an attempt 'get a rise' from this other poster. This is not a nice thing to do and could easily be classed as another sort of harassment.
    hmm, I'm gonna go with pot/kettle on this one, I thank.
    Of course, this thread wasn't designed to bait Z, merely to answer the question he raised in his repeated appeals to the unseen quivering masses who would support his arguments, if only they weren't so scared of me / another forthright female poster. I think we've pretty much put this one to bed. Of course, IJ and Z are best buds, cut from the same cloth, banned at the same time (for harassing female posters, oh, the irony!) so it's touching that they would back each other up.

    I think you may see harassment everywhere simply as a consequence of your behaviour being in a way 'harassing'. Your malignant fascinations could be a function of the environment you have chosen to create.
    Can you spell P-R-O-J-E-C-T-I-O-N?

    Don't you think it would be nice to give us Lurkers some of your delightful input on a different topic for a change?
    Now that's just boring passive-aggression. You're familiar with that, right?
    Or he could just be sincere in his attempts to further stalk/analyse/critique me.
    Hard to say, dude got issues in all kinds of flavours.

    I've spent a good deal of time here, Coriolis, teaching you some of the basic principles of being able to critically evaluate an argument. I hope you put them to good use to save yourself further embarrassment.

    And no, to answer your own particular obsession, you don't look fat, just really, really silly.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    Gosh, the world looks so small from up here on my high horse of menstruation.

  9. #259
    figsfiggyfigs
    Guest

    Default

    Oh man. Fantastic post.

  10. #260
    Warflower Nijntje's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    CRZY
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    3,225

    Default

    I was going to post something, but i think this sums it up.

    Quote Originally Posted by YWIR View Post
    Oh man. Fantastic post.

    Also, @YWIR used to intimidate me when i was first in vent, but that was mainly because loud people scare me, and her use of caps is sublime.

    BUT NOW I LOVE HER FACE AND I CAN CAPS TOO.

    Terrible things happen to good people every day.
    Consequentially, I am not one of the good people.
    I am one of the terrible things.
    .



    Conclusion: Dinosaurs


Similar Threads

  1. [E9] Type Nine: Are you drawn to other Type Nines?
    By gromit in forum Enneatypes
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 11-27-2012, 09:44 PM
  2. [INTP] INTPs: are you obsessed, by default?
    By alpaca in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 58
    Last Post: 09-11-2009, 09:16 AM
  3. Introverts: Are you energized by other Introverts?
    By BlackCat in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 02-19-2009, 03:35 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO