"The troll among the ignorant
"I am an Atheist and this is why. Reasons why I became an atheist, and exploring myths of religions. New blogs on Monday, Wednesday, Friday and every second Sunday. Other days if I post it will be either memes or other funnies.
Wed., 5 March 2014 "The troll among the ignorant" Every blogger, debater or commenter online will encounter the following three people at some point in their online activity. These people consist of the ignorant, the troll and the liar. The unfortunate and sad part is that often it is difficult to tell who you are dealing with when you encounter them online. The truth is there is only one of these characters that is worth engaging and that is the ignorant person.
Ignorance is nothing to be ashamed of, in fact I will happily state I am ignorant of many economic principles. However, to combat that I am trying to learn more about them. In the same way the ignorant person is going on line asking questions as they really do not know.
On the other hand the troll. Is just out to raise your blood pressure and get you punching a hole in your computer screen.
The liar is similar to a troll in that this person lies on purpose to defend their position. They raise your blood pressure as well the difference is they think you are an idiot while a troll knows you are not. This is the creationist that denies the fossil record. But here is the problem the following question could come from any of these three people. Why are there still monkeys if humans evolved from monkeys?
The only way I have been able to discern sometimes who is trolling, ignorant or lying is if I have met the person before on a forum or comment thread. This is why I will sometimes engage even the most randomly absurd question from a commenter.
What do you do to determine who is trolling, who is ignorant and who is a liar?"
http://iamchristianiamanatheist.blogspot.com/2014/03/the-troll-among-ignorant.html
Questions: Do you agree or disagree, in part or whole, with this seasoned atheist blogger's assessment of "online activity"? And "What do you do to determine who is trolling, who is ignorant and who is a liar" in online spirituality forums?
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyThere is no doubt there is ignorance among us, I include myself in that and am perhaps at the front of the line when it comes to a lot of things. With that said I would say there is plenty of arrogance as well! and it is in the form of knowing everything, something I personally don't give much credence to.
[b]"The troll among the ignorant
"I am an Atheist and this is why. Reasons why I became an atheist, and exploring myths of religions. New blogs on Monday, Wednesday, Friday and every second Sunday. Other days if I post it will be either memes or other funnies.
Wed., 5 March 2014 "The troll among the ignorant" [i]Every blogger, debater ...[text shortened]... to determine who is trolling, who is ignorant and who is a liar" in online spirituality forums?[/b]
Trolls? you betcha, and there are plenty here. They will ask needling questions and drive you nuts.
Liars? definitely, one recent thread was just that! a cleverly fabricated lie under the guise of a joke! but it was a lie plain and simple.
So... What do I do to determine who is what? I will let experience with those speak for itself, and decide if I would like to engage them or not. When you know what you are dealing with you know how you can work with it, who is serious who is not.
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyAt the beginning of your recent thread ""Interacting with 'Angry Atheists'", when you asked for comments on your copy paste, twhitehead replied saying "I think you are trolling us". When you asked him "On what basis have you drawn that summary conclusion, twhitehead?", he said this, and ~ I would say ~ hit the nail on the head:
[b]Questions: Do you agree or disagree, in part or whole, with this seasoned atheist blogger's assessment of "online activity"? And "What do you do to determine who is trolling, who is ignorant and who is a liar" in online spirituality forums?[/b]
On the basis of your past behavior and the content of your OP. You carefully pick topics that you know will get a strong reaction (usually because they are so obviously wrong) and then you carefully avoid discussing them properly. Then when you do comment, it demonstrates that you have chosen to ignore anything you have been told in the past - which again tends to get a big reaction. Now you are piling it on by pretending that that reaction that you have so carefully engineered is 'anger' - and if you get a reaction this time you can pretend it just confirms your OP. Conclusion: You are trolling.
This was one of the most forthright and lucid responses to your OP on that thread, and, of course ~ as is is your wont ~ you did not respond to it.
Originally posted by FMF
At the beginning of your recent thread ""Interacting with 'Angry Atheists'", when you asked for comments on your copy paste, twhitehead replied saying "I think you are trolling us". When you asked him "On what basis have you drawn that summary conclusion, twhitehead?", he said this, and ~ I would say ~ hit the nail on the head:
On the basis of your past behavior and the content of your OP. You carefully pick topics that you know will get a strong reaction (usually because they are so obviously wrong) and then you carefully avoid discussing them properly. Then when you do comment, it demonstrates that you have chosen to ignore anything you have been told in the past - which again tends to get a big reaction. Now you are piling it on by pretending that that reaction that you have so carefully engineered is 'anger' - and if you get a reaction this time you can pretend it just confirms your OP. Conclusion: You are trolling.
This was one of the most forthright and lucid responses to your OP on that thread, and, of course ~ as is is your wont ~ you did not respond to it.
Originally posted by twhitehead (Page 4)
On the basis of your past behavior and the content of your OP. You carefully pick topics that you know will get a strong reaction (usually because they are so obviously wrong) and then you carefully avoid discussing them properly.
Then when you do comment, it demonstrates that you have chosen to ignore anything you have been told in the past - which again tends to get a big reaction.
Now you are pilling it on by pretending that that reaction that you have so carefully engineered is 'anger' - and if you get a reaction this time you can pretend it just confirms your OP.
Conclusion: You are trolling.
Originally posted Reply by Grampy Bobby (Next Post in Sequence Page 4)
"You carefully pick topics that you know will get a strong reaction... " twhitehead
"The Word of God is alive and powerful, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of the soul and spirit, and of the joints and the marrow, and is a critic of thoughts and intents of the heart." (Hebrews 4:12)
twhitehead, the Word of God causes the "strong reaction" on the part of those who have long since privately decided that an Omnipotent and Omniscient Personal God doesn't exist because it's nuclear in comparison with their feeble protestations.
"Interacting with 'Angry Atheists'" Thread 158548
See. You just talked past him. You made no effort to engage him and what he had actually said. You deliberately referred back to something you chose to call "the Word of God" as if that had been what you had posted in your OP. In fact, what you posted was a spammy copy paste taken from http://www.apologeticsindex.org/2770-interacting-with-angry-atheists
Are you really claiming your spammy copy pasted reprimands from confirmation bias blogs and web sites is you uttering "the Word of God"?
People can see for themselves: Thread 158548
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyHere is what twhitehead was referring to when he described your attempts to get a "strong reaction". Here is a partial list of your thread titles in the last 2-3 months:
twhitehead, the Word of God causes the "strong reaction" on the part of those who have long since privately decided that an Omnipotent and Omniscient Personal God doesn't exist because it's nuclear in comparison with their feeble protestations.
"Interacting with 'Angry Atheists'"
"Nobody talks so constantly about God as those who insist that there is no God."
One Christian's understanding of atheism:
"Even Atheists Fear the Word 'God'..."
"C.S. Lewis: from theism to Christianity"
The Emptiness of Atheism
"What would the world look like if all people were atheists?"
"A challenge for atheistic beliefs (theists are welcome too)"
"Why Do Atheists Like to Write on Christian Forum Topics?"
One Atheist's understanding of theism...
"The Causes of Atheism"
"Why Do Men Reject God?"
Why Are Atheists So Angry?"
"Why I Am Not A Christian"
"How Atheists Think"
"Behold, the six types of atheists"
"Atheist Talking Points: What is Atheism?"
"Famous Quotes by Atheists & Scoffers"
"Twelve Questions to Ask an Atheist"
None of these OPs of yours can be described as "the Word of God". They are almost completely made up of copy pasted material from blogs and web sites.
Originally posted by FMFOriginally posted by FMF
See. You just talked past him. You made no effort to engage him and what he had actually said. You deliberately referred back to something you chose to call "the Word of God" as if that had been what you had posted in your OP. In fact, what you posted was a spammy copy paste taken from http://www.apologeticsindex.org/2770-interacting-with-angry-atheists
Are ...[text shortened]... s you uttering "the Word of God"?
People can see for themselves: Thread 158548
This was one of the most forthright and lucid responses to your OP on that thread, and, of course ~ as is is your wont ~ you did not respond to it."
Originally posted by FMF
See. You just talked past him.
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyThat's right. You did not respond to what he'd said. You instead made some bizarre claim ~ referring to your plethora of copy pasted OPs on atheists as "the Word of God". I think twhitehead got it exactly right and your refusal to respond to what he'd actually said was just more of the same from you. And that all happened weeks ago and you still haven't responded properly.
Originally posted by FMF
This was one of the most forthright and lucid responses to your OP on that thread, and, of course ~ as is is your wont ~ [b]you did not respond to it."
Originally posted by FMF
See. You just talked past him.[/b]
Originally posted by yoctobyteInsightful, yoctobyte.... though the thread's only five hours old, the 'seasoned atheist blogger' rests his case. Thanks.
There is no doubt there is [b]ignorance among us, I include myself in that and am perhaps at the front of the line when it comes to a lot of things. With that said I would say there is plenty of arrogance as well! and it is in the form of knowing everything, something I personally don't give much credence to.
Trolls? yo ...[text shortened]... you know what you are dealing with you know how you can work with it, who is serious who is not.[/b]
___________________________________________
Originally posted by yoctobyteDo you consider every "cleverly fabricated" April Fools joke to be "a lie plain and simple"?
[b]Liars? definitely, one recent thread was just that! a cleverly fabricated lie under the guise of a joke! but it was a lie plain and simple.[/b]
Originally posted by yoctobyteGuise of a joke, my ass. It was a joke. Several theists even thought it was funny.
There is no doubt there is [b]ignorance among us, I include myself in that and am perhaps at the front of the line when it comes to a lot of things. With that said I would say there is plenty of arrogance as well! and it is in the form of knowing everything, something I personally don't give much credence to.
Trolls? yo ...[text shortened]... you know what you are dealing with you know how you can work with it, who is serious who is not.[/b]
Originally posted by SwissGambitWell perhaps I have not been around long enough to know how you are. Seemed to me several theists thought your posts to be genuine at first, until you let everybody in on it.
Guise of a joke, my ass. It was a joke. Several theists even thought it was funny.