Mind Shuttering of the Alt Right

[christos200]

If that's his shtick I generally agree with his right to say so. Of course I also think that if someone tells me "I want you to call me this" and I then directly call them something else they are completely within reasonable bounds if they punch my face in, so I don't do that and certainly wouldn't be interested in this jerk's justifications on the subject either.

If you do not call me 'Your Majesty' it is within my rights to punch you in the face, right?

 

[Traitorfish]

OK, look at it this way -- whether I condemn Milo online actions or not, that is irrelevant to his giving a speech. Giving a speech on cultural appropriation is not being a jerk, so my standard of "jerkness" does not apply to that.

That all depends on whether we believe Milo that what he calls "a speech on cultural appropriation" will be nothing more, that it will not be used as an opportunity to promote his brand and thus platform to harass his opponents, or that the speech itself will not be used as such a platform. You can argue that he should be extended the benefit of the doubt, but then the question becomes how far a person should be extended such a benefit, and whether Milo has not already exhausted whatever he is due.

This is false. I do not support the Colonel's Regime; in my opinion it was a failed authoritarian regime. Personally, I am a Minarchist Libertarian and as such I stand opposed to big government and authoritarianism. I am a firm believer in limited constitutional government.

The allegation is cheerfully withdrawn.

Some more leftist bullies


Link to video.

He's wearing suspenders and isn't visibly participating in a wedding party or an Oi! band; smoke bombs and flying bricks are the least that sort of misconduct deserves.

Of course I also think that if someone tells me "I want you to call me this" and I then directly call them something else they are completely within reasonable bounds if they punch my face in

Given that the point of etiquette is allowing us to navigate society without punching each other, it seems like we should be able to resolve disagreements over proper etiquette without punching each other. Else, we're valuing the letter of the thing over the spirit.

 

[Gori the Grey]

If you do not call me 'Your Majesty' it is within my rights to punch you in the face, right?

Evidently, there is actually a student somewhere who is trolling the whole alternate pronouns thing by insisting that he be called "Your majesty"

 

[Timsup2nothin]

If you do not call me 'Your Majesty' it is within my rights to punch you in the face, right?

Nope. But if you tell me you prefer Christos and I persistently call you nitwit instead you are welcome to track me down.

By the way, liking Gori's post when he blatantly mocks you indicates that you didn't get the joke.

 

[civver_764]

Nothing says "I've lost this argument" quite like throwing in a random off topic video. I accept your surrender.

What argument? You keep making claims about Milo's behavior, I asked you for examples, and you outright refused. So where is the argument supposed to go from there?

That all depends on whether we believe Milo that what he calls "a speech on cultural appropriation" will be nothing more, that it will not be used as an opportunity to promote his brand and thus platform to harass his opponents, or that the speech itself will not be used as such a platform. You can argue that he should be extended the benefit of the doubt, but then the question becomes how far a person should be extended such a benefit, and whether Milo has not already exhausted whatever he is due.

I mean, there's a lot of people who think anarchism and communism should not be given the benefit of the doubt. What's so different about Milo, besides that you disagree with what he's saying? It surely more healthy for society to let all ideas be heard, rather than to resort to violence and obstruction. True? Why should we fear ideas?

 

[Timsup2nothin]

What argument? You keep making claims about Milo's behavior, I asked you for examples, and you outright refused. So where is the argument supposed to go from there?

Nowhere, since you claim to be incapable of finding examples after "googling and googling" you are either not interested or I'd have to find one for you in braille.

Moderator Action: It's unacceptable to attack a user, especially without provocation. One point infraction. - Vincour
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[christos200]

Nowhere, since you claim to be incapable of finding examples after "googling and googling" you are either not interested or I'd have to find one for you in braille.

Usually the one who claims something is the one who is responsible for finding the examples. Since you are the one making claims about Milo, it should be you who backs up those claims with proof.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Interesting shift in the wind...maybe.

My latest troll run through Breitbart netted me some arguments and a lot of name calling, but no "paid troll that really agrees with us" style dismissals.

This may indicate that they are waking up to how stupid it is to think that their disgusting views are universally held.

Or it may be a one off since the topic I was trolling in was the dismissal of Bannon from the NSC being spun into a win for Bannon and a sign of solidarity between him and Dingbat Don. That's so ridiculous that even at Breitbart it has served as a source of disagreement, and it is possible that in that air of uncertainty my trolling struck more nerves than it would otherwise..

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Usually the one who claims something is the one who is responsible for finding the examples. Since you are the one making claims about Milo, it should be you who backs up those claims with proof.

It SHOULD?

Really?

Is that like, a rule I should be concerned about, or just your opinion that I don't give a rat's hind end about? I suspect the latter.

 

[Ryika]

It SHOULD?

Really?

Is that like, a rule I should be concerned about, or just your opinion that I don't give a rat's hind end about? I suspect the latter.

Would you change you stance if people started making up things about you that you can't disprove?

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Would you change you stance if people started making up things about you that you can't disprove?

LOL...the thing you seem to be missing is that what I've said about Milo that people claim they "can't find" or insist that I "prove" are actually exactly the same as his self characterizations. The things you are calling "accusations" and demanding I prove are things he is proud of.

 

[Ryika]

LOL...the thing you seem to be missing is that what I've said about Milo that people claim they "can't find" or insist that I "prove" are actually exactly the same as his self characterizations. The things you are calling "accusations" and demanding I prove are things he is proud of.

The claim that he self-characterizes as somebody who harasses individuals is yet another accusation that you have provided no evidence for.
I mean, it might very well be true, I'm not that much into the whole Milo-nonsense, but as far as I'm aware, he self-characterizes as somebody who spreads ideas that go counter to the narrative of parts of the left.

The way you act however makes me think that all of your claims just sound like wild assertions - precisely because you're unwilling to actually provide evidence. The people who waste everyone's time with explaining that things are self-evident and obvious instead of just providing the evidence that they were asked to provide are usually people who are just spreading nonsense.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

The claim that he self-characterizes as somebody who harasses individuals is yet another accusation that you have provided no evidence for.
I mean, it might very well be true, I'm not that much into the whole Milo-nonsense, but as far as I'm aware, he self-characterizes as somebody who spreads ideas that go counter to the narrative of parts of the left.

The way you act however makes me think that all of your claims just sound like wild assertions - precisely because you're unwilling to actually provide evidence. The people who waste everyone's time with explaining that things are self-evident and obvious instead of just providing the evidence that they were asked to provide are usually people who are just spreading nonsense.

And yet I have credibility that you lack. Curious that.

Meanwhile, should you ever care to make the effort (which I don't actually recommend) of spending time on Breitbart and similar hate sites you too will be able to speak on what sort of relationship Milo has with his fans and the self characterizations that relationship relies upon.

 

[Ryika]

I'm not sure why you think you've got "credibility". Outside of the circle of people who already agree with you, your reputation seems to be pretty bad as well.
But that is of course the opinion I've formed from the limited amount of social activity I, as the outcast, can have on this site. Maybe it's seriously warped.

In any case, I am not sure why you're citing your "credibility" anyway, your "credibility" will only ever be relevant to the people who are more or less on your side.
You might, simply by posting a few examples, convert people from the other side, or the neutral ground, to your side. You're choosing not to.

Why you're acting that way still seems pretty obvious to me.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I'm not sure why you think you've got "credibility". Outside of the circle of people who already agree with you, your reputation seems to be pretty bad as well.
But that is of course the opinion I've formed from the limited amount of social activity I, as the outcast, can have on this site. Maybe it's seriously warped.

In any case, I am not sure why you're citing your "credibility" anyway, your "credibility" will only ever be relevant to the people who are more or less on your side.
You might, simply by posting a few examples, convert people from the other side, or the neutral ground, to your side. You're choosing not to.

Why you're acting that way still seems pretty obvious to me.

Just like I am well aware of your motives, which is why even if it weren't my standard response I wouldn't bother complying with any request from you.

The internet is full of stuff. Anyone can find a link to "prove" just about anything. So I find it pointless. To do or to ask for.

Instead I just maintain consistency. Other than the occasional troll when I say I saw something on Breitbart no one questions whether I am just making stuff up, because there's no reason to think that I would. I just report what I see. I don't need to convince anyone, so there's no reason for me to make stuff up to support some position.

Were I the sort of troll who just picks a side in an argument at random and then feels compelled to support it to the "win" then I'd be a link spewing machine.

 

[civver_764]

Just like I am well aware of your motives, which is why even if it weren't my standard response I wouldn't bother complying with any request from you.

Man, you are being so unnecessarily standoffish. We are just trying to have a discussion with you. There's no conspiracy here, we're just honestly expressing our opinions. Part of a discussion is that when you make claims you would back them up with something. This is known as the "burden of proof" and is not just somebody's opinion, it's a pretty ingrained part of the process. If you don't want to have this discussion, that's fine, but there's no reason to assume malicious intent on our part.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Man, you are being so unnecessarily standoffish. We are just trying to have a discussion with you. There's no conspiracy here, we're just honestly expressing our opinions. Part of a discussion is that when you make claims you would back them up with something. This is known as the "burden of proof" and is not just somebody's opinion, it's a pretty ingrained part of the process. If you don't want to have this discussion, that's fine, but there's no reason to assume malicious intent on our part.

I assumed no such intent on your part. You clipped off the explanation of my behavior that was in fact meant pretty much just for you, because the long term regulars around here have heard it before.

 

[Ryika]

Just like I am well aware of your motives, which is why even if it weren't my standard response I wouldn't bother complying with any request from you.

I still don't know what you think you're aware of, but if you think I have some higher motives here, then you're delusional.

The internet is full of stuff. Anyone can find a link to "prove" just about anything. So I find it pointless. To do or to ask for.

Well, I did a quick search and the only thing I found were other hard-left sites claiming that he's totally into outing people at his college tour, of course also without providing evidence.

The picture I get when searching is a pretty clear one, of people who want Milo to be a bigger nemesis than he is, people who just believe the lies of others without checking whether they're true, and then going on to spread them themselves.

Instead I just maintain consistency. Other than the occasional troll when I say I saw something on Breitbart no one questions whether I am just making stuff up, because there's no reason to think that I would. I just report what I see. I don't need to convince anyone, so there's no reason for me to make stuff up to support some position.

For a person who says that you don't have to convince anyone, you spend an awful lot of time trying to convince people that you don't have to convince anyone.

Were I the sort of troll who just picks a side in an argument at random and then feels compelled to support it to the "win" then I'd be a link spewing machine.

I would rather think such a person would avoid links and just repeat their position to make sure they don't accidentally find information that goes against their narrative.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I still don't know what you think you're aware of, but if you think I have some higher motives here, then you're delusional.

So when I claim to understand your motives I'm delusional...

Why you're acting that way still seems pretty obvious to me.

Yet when you claim to understand mine you are...what?

I would rather think such a person would avoid links and just repeat their position to make sure they don't accidentally find information that goes against their narrative.

Well, you have much more direct experience of that sort, so I am inclined to defer to your first hand knowledge. No links to sources required.

 

[Ryika]

So when I claim to understand your motives I'm delusional...

Yeah, because you seem to think you've notices some kind of hidden plan behind me just trying to see things as what they are.

Yet when you claim to understand mine you are...what?

Joking aside though, I'm a person who evaluates the behavior you showed and makes a guess at why you're acting the way you are.
The difference is that I do it in a very specific thread, on a very specific number of posts, while you're basing your nonsensical assumptions on what you think you know about me.

Well, you have much more direct experience of that sort, so I am inclined to defer to your first hand knowledge. No links to sources required.

Well, I admit, I pretty much handed you that one.