@divegeester saidYou do seem convinced that constant repetition will make something become true. In reality this is all just a reaction to one response that I made to FMF earlier in this thread. I guess that's the power of an accurate observation. Perhaps also another illustration as to why so many here prefer just to red thumb and move on.
You are either misremembering the thread, lying, or maybe fantasising.
Even Ghost of a Duke tried (in vain) to coach Relentless Pete back from the edge of forum intellectual calamity, but he was having nothing of it and allowed his hubris to drive him on, doubling down again and again and again, insisting that the only true atheist was one who converted to theism on t ...[text shortened]... unds” were totally self inflicted.
The thread is still accessible, you should go and have a read.
11 Feb 21
@relentless-red saidAre you now going to double down on it again and claim what you said in spirituality and your subsequent behaviour, is not as I describe it?
You do seem convinced that constant repetition will make something become true. In reality this is all just a reaction to one response that I made to FMF earlier in this thread. I guess that's the power of an accurate observation.
Are you claiming I’m making it up..?
11 Feb 21
@relentless-red saidUnless you are going to claim that I’m lying, then this lazy little barb by you is actually a non sequitur.
Perhaps also another illustration as to why so many here prefer just to red thumb and move on.
@relentless-red saidI only repeat in here what I know to be true. The repetition is part of the scab-picking at your brittle intellectual dishonestly. I am content for you to be “liked” and “thumbed up” by the weak minded, unprincipled forum buddies you have in this place. I’m here for the game, not to be liked.
You do seem convinced that constant repetition will make something become true.
@relentless-red saidWhat does a thumb down actually mean if it's coming from a poster like you and if you're doing it anonymously?
Perhaps also another illustration as to why so many here prefer just to red thumb and move on.
11 Feb 21
@relentless-red saidLike when you repeated the word "sealion" over and over and over and over and over again in lieu of addressing whatever you were ostensibly replying to? Did that constant repetition "make something become true"?
You do seem convinced that constant repetition will make something become true.
- Joined
- 06 Nov 15
- Moves
- 41301
@divegeester saidI'm glad that we have been able to clarify that for you Divegeester.
Oh good; because I thought for a moment there that you were suggesting I adopt your philosophy of jumping into historical disagreements between other posters, of which I know little about and throwing out some little poisonous barbs at whoever it is who is attacking my forum buddy, irrespective of the actual background.
Now, go and be a dick no more.
@fmf saidSo are you finally admitting that thumbs down make you very, very, very, very angry?
Around April last year, a Spirituality Forum poster called dj2becker accidentally posted with a 10-year-old account called mariekeXIV and then quickly deleted it, logged out, logged back in, and posted the same message as dj2becker.
The mariekeXIV account had never started any chess games nor indeed ever made any chess moves at all, nor was there any sign the account had star ...[text shortened]... nts.
Edit: correction, mariekeXIV started one game in 2010 but no move was made by either player.
There are plenty of users here. And yet you find it hard to believe that seven of them may disagree with you, because, in your mind, your posts are always so reasonable.
@divegeester saidThere are very few people here I would describe as "unprincipled, partisan and weak-minded".
Now you seem upset.
Perhaps the guys in your clique will come along and alert your post (for using the word d**k) like they did mine, but I doubt it, because like you they are unprincipled, partisan and weak-minded.
Nice talking with you.
Maybe just two. Okay, three.
11 Feb 21
@suzianne saidNo. Not in the slightest. And I don't use them. But I find the way people use them interesting especially when they talk about why they are doing it, and how they feel the need to do it anonymously, etc. Interested. Not angry.
So are you finally admitting that thumbs down make you very, very, very, very angry?
11 Feb 21
@suzianne saidMy posts are reasonable and usually pretty well-expressed. Indeed, I think quite a lot of what I say, particularly on the SF, just goes over your head.
There are plenty of users here. And yet you find it hard to believe that seven of them may disagree with you, because, in your mind, your posts are always so reasonable.
But wait, why on Earth would people thumb a post down because they disagree with it? It seems silly. Ignore or engage, I get it. It's a message board.
But anonymous thumbs down instead of posting? It seems so inane. As does anonymous thumbs down because one dislikes somebody.
It would never occur to me to thumb someone down because I was unimpressed by their character or style. I'd either ignore or engage.
@fmf saidSome posters here receive unwarranted "blowback" from you two at every opportunity. They are chastised (by you two) nearly every time they post. Yes, many posters have been so targeted and hassled (by you two) that they no longer post here. And when they do, you two are on them right away. Sometimes it is because these posters have said things which were questionable, even creepy at times. Others were incessantly attacked (by you two) merely because you don't like them. I'd certainly like to know how you two have gotten away with these antics for as long as you have. My suspicion is that one of you was born with a silver tongue which never fails to talk you out of trouble and the other has a way of throwing cash around to make his troubles disappear.
How is it a "form of censorship"?
Would there be some deletion or curtailment of the use of the thumbs?
My point is that some posters (like you two) have expressed a desire to see who thumbs them down for one reason and one reason only, and that is to initiate a "blowback" campaign of incessant attacks until they either stop posting or leave the site. This is how you two have run the Spirituality Forum for years, for most of the time I have been here. And (probably due to a marked drop off of posting in the Spirituality Forum) now you two are apparently branching out and bringing this kind of anti-social behavior to the rest of the forums. It has not gone unnoticed.
And that is what I mean by censorship. But you knew that.
11 Feb 21
@fmf saidWe know you greatly dislike people not agreeing with you. In fact, some might say it makes you angry, so very angry. And we know that you are so used to being able to attack anybody who speaks out against you. We know this well.
My posts are reasonable and usually pretty well-expressed. Indeed, I think quite a lot of what I say, particularly on the SF, just goes over your head.
But wait, why on Earth would people thumb a post down because they disagree with it? It seems silly. Ignore or engage, I get it. It's a message board.
But anonymous thumbs down instead of posting? It seems so inane. As doe ...[text shortened]... umb someone down because I was unimpressed by their character or style. I'd either ignore or engage.
Too bad.
@divegeester saidDoes the name Very Rusty mean anything to you?
Oh good; because I thought for a moment there that you were suggesting I adopt your philosophy of jumping into historical disagreements between other posters, of which I know little about and throwing out some little poisonous barbs at whoever it is who is attacking my forum buddy, irrespective of the actual background.
You already do this. Historically.