What happened to Hile Troy's Think Tank?

Free, open, general chat on any topic.

Moderators: Orlion, balon!, aliantha

User avatar
Fist and Faith
Magister Vitae
Posts: 23439
Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2002 8:14 pm
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 30 times

Post by Fist and Faith »

SoulBiter wrote:
Fist and Faith wrote:wayfriend,

I should specify. I only mean declaring the intentions of another poster in the Current Events thread.

As for how to respond to "the Jan 6 investigations are just a way to distract the US public from the fact that Trump won the election"? I'd go with 'I disagree. I think..." If you want to change someone's mind, you're going to have to work for it. Meaning well qualified links or valid reasoning. If they want to change your mind, they are going to have to work for it. Meaning well qualified links or valid reasoning. Nobody is going to change their mind just based on the other person making a claim. And nobody needs links or reasoning to prove something they already think. Everybody, on any side of any debate, is in the same boat. If anybody wants to change anybody else's mind, they'll have to put in the work.
That is fair. I agree because propaganda and disinformation can apply to just about anything that anyone might disagree with. Its just about in line with starting a post with "Well all of what you said is a big fat lie". Its not constructive to a discussion. Rather it would be better to say "Well I disagree with that post or information and here is why I disagree with it". That disagreement wont settle who is right or wrong but have we really ever changed anyone's mind in these debates? I would say that its happened but its a rarity.

Example: the thread on Capital punishment. I have said that I agree with it but the posts there are so solid and well reasoned that its got me rethinking my support for it.
Not sure what other option there is. I can't demand proof sufficient to change my mind, and penalize you for not providing it, eh?

Everybody say what you think. It you just want to state it as your opinion, and not try to support it, fine. If you want to try to convince someone else, go for it. If you want someone to support their statement, ask them to do so. If they don't, then you're not convinced. Eventually, maybe you'll stop reading posts by someone who never supports their position, or does so in ways you think are useless.
All lies and jest
Still a man hears what he wants to hear
And disregards the rest
-Paul Simon
User avatar
SoulBiter
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 9190
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 2:02 am
Has thanked: 74 times
Been thanked: 12 times

Post by SoulBiter »

I agree with all of that as well Fist....
We miss you Tracie but your Spirit will always shine brightly on the Watch Image
User avatar
Skyweir
Lord of Light
Posts: 25188
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2002 6:27 am
Location: Australia
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 18 times

Post by Skyweir »

Kudos to all!!!!

I would be interested in a civil current affairs discussion thread.

I very much support an approach that does not assume intent. Intent is often overtly demonstrated in the logic presented so there’s often no need or value in assuming it. And it can often be a disservice to the subject under discussion.

I don’t support banning specific words that aren’t insults ~ like misinformation. Misinformation is a neutral observational claim that can’t stand alone without any substantive input to support it.

And an observation that should also be readily demonstrated, in the manner Fist has expressed.

As to changing minds, I agree that is a thing to be worked for. I guess simply declaring “disinformation� without any reasoning to accompany it, makes such a declaration more reasonably intent to shut a person/poster down.

I personally see little value in doing that ~ but see greater value in setting out your view and backing it up.

I also though see no value in passive aggression, that too adds nothing of value imho.

As to sources, we should be able to be challenged sources for bias but how do you successfully do that given political bias is often inherently connected to your positioning?

I know we’ve discussed this before but I think it’s a valid point to discuss and to be clear about. Otherwise we are back at square one, using an accusation of source-bias to shut them down.

I hope that this experiment works and that the kind of interactions that are occurring right here in this thread are an indication of future engagements and discussions in the Current Affairs thread ~

cuz if so we won’t have progressed any further and those of us that do not learn from our own history here are doomed to repeat it there.

So guess that means leaving discord in the past, where it belongs.

Cuz if we go forward with pre-conceived negativity and judgements (of each other), we limit what we can truly learn (including of each other).

I appreciate that’s a hard pill to swallow but seems like the only way to start afresh.

So fingers and toes crossed we can all give it a good hard crack.
Last edited by Skyweir on Sat Mar 04, 2023 4:14 am, edited 1 time in total.
ImageImageImageImage
keep smiling 😊 :D 😊

'Smoke me a kipper .. I'll be back for breakfast!'
Image

EZBoard SURVIVOR
User avatar
Skyweir
Lord of Light
Posts: 25188
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2002 6:27 am
Location: Australia
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 18 times

Post by Skyweir »

Also I see Wos points ~ I like that he flags his source by use of the graphic representation of the outlet sourced.

The Close is a place to discuss religious, supernatural topics so feel Wos is posting his posts in the right place ~ but I know and can appreciate that he does do the work to find relevance … despite my not always getting that.

I guess Wos you love God sooo much you find a way to insinuate religious wisdoms as they relate to every day human experience.

The thing is you don’t always offer any independent thoughts of your own to accompany your pasted articles. Maybe a link to them would suffice ~ with a snippet from them? That way they don’t take up so much room 🤷�♀�

I don’t agree with shutting you down ~ even though some of your articles seem irrelevant or preachy lol 😂 cuz it’s who you are. And you are a key player and staple in the Watch family. ♥�

You embrace Catholicism wholly. I see that as a positive in your life and I do genuinely admire you and your odd ball 😉 religiosity ~ but it’s not a universal truth and definitely not for all.

Here’s hoping we can move forward in a good way.
ImageImageImageImage
keep smiling 😊 :D 😊

'Smoke me a kipper .. I'll be back for breakfast!'
Image

EZBoard SURVIVOR
User avatar
Wosbald
A Brainwashed Religious Flunkie
Posts: 6084
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 1:35 am
Been thanked: 2 times

Post by Wosbald »

+JMJ+
Skyweir wrote:[…]

The thing is you don’t always offer any independent thoughts of your own to accompany your pasted articles. Maybe a link to them would suffice ~ with a snippet from them? That way they don’t take up so much room 🤷�♀�

[…]
If F&F wants to keep CURRENT EVENTS moving at a brisk pace, then I can understand not wanting to break-up said kinetic energy with longish articles. Actuallly, that's a main reason why I hadn't posted there before today. Until I was explicitly invited to do so, I thought my article-posts might not be a comfortable fit for the thread's mojo.

But if I'm being asked to split-the-diff, then I should be able to find some alternate way to both make the posts distinctive & comely and keep to the thread's topical, rapid-fire mojo. I can simply reserve the older Wos-formatting style for all the other threads.

Image


Image
User avatar
Savor Dam
Will Be Herd!
Posts: 6140
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 7:02 am
Location: Pacific NorthWet
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Post by Savor Dam »

Fist and Faith wrote:Everybody say what you think. It you just want to state it as your opinion, and not try to support it, fine. If you want to try to convince someone else, go for it. If you want someone to support their statement, ask them to do so. If they don't, then you're not convinced. Eventually, maybe you'll stop reading posts by someone who never supports their position, or does so in ways you think are useless.
Coupled with an evolving rule-set like what is happening in Current Events, this can work. By itself, the quote doesn't differ much from the rules originally set by the longer-serving mod prior to the Tank getting nuked...but without guardrails, we saw what happened.

Not pretty when the Creator or the Worm forces you to make the World anew, nu?
Let's craft the Law to make it a good one...
Love prevails.
~ Tracie Mckinney-Hammon

Change is not a process for the impatient.
~ Barbara Reinhold

A government which robs Peter to pay Paul, can always count on the support of Paul.
~ George Bernard Shaw
User avatar
Skyweir
Lord of Light
Posts: 25188
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2002 6:27 am
Location: Australia
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 18 times

Post by Skyweir »

Wos I was hoping to flag that it would be nice to hear your personal thoughts and perspectives rather than extrapolating them from the articles you copy & paste.

I think a keen mind like yours has much to offer and you don’t very often share your insights seperate to the Catholic-centric articles you post. ♥�

Agree with SD that Fist, you are well intentioned first, and that the approach you have described is not dissimilar to the one Hashi employed.

That methodology definitely had some merit ~ but I personally agree with Murrins take ~ basic debate/mooting rules generally place an onus on the person making a claim … to provide proof of that position.

That’s kinda debating 101 isn’t it?

I agree that each of the statements Murrin highlighted would have had greater rigour (and er go attracted greater thought & engagement input) had they been sourced and supported.

The alternative is an exchange of opinions. Which is fine and all but offers less gravitas to engage with (and is more easily dismissed).

Plus discussions that rely mainly on the (arguably uninformed) opinion of participants is far more likely to include misinformation and disinformation.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s44159-021-00006-y
ImageImageImageImage
keep smiling 😊 :D 😊

'Smoke me a kipper .. I'll be back for breakfast!'
Image

EZBoard SURVIVOR
User avatar
Fist and Faith
Magister Vitae
Posts: 23439
Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2002 8:14 pm
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 30 times

Post by Fist and Faith »

Skyweir wrote:That’s kinda debating 101 isn’t it?
Indeed it is. But we're not a debating club that requires all to follow certain rules and procedures. We're a site dedicated to a fantasy series/author, which also has a place for discussion of, among many other things, current events. So it all depends on each person's goals, and on how seriously they want to be taken by people who have different goals. I can claim the members of the US House of Representatives are changelings from Star Trek DS9. You can say I need to give evidence to support my claim. But I don't. I will if I want you to believe me. But if I don't care if you believe me, I'm done. In fact, I could tell you it's on you to prove me wrong. If you want me to believe I'm wrong, you're going to have to prove it to me.

I would not be surprised if everyone dismissed my claim very soon. I would have a good laugh at someone who actually started presenting evidence that I'm wrong. If I made such bizarre claims with any regularity, I would expect everybody to stop reading my posts entirely. I think it's somewhat Darwinian.

Still, I haven't broken any rules that all must agree upon before posting in Current Events.


I had a wrong interpretation of "misinformation." I guess if someone is misinformed, they will then innocently pass on that misinformation. There's no ill intent. Personally, I would say "That information is inaccurate."

However, I still say "propaganda" is an accusation of ill intent. Certainly, I see things a certain way, as we all do. So is it propaganda every time we give an opinion of anything?
All lies and jest
Still a man hears what he wants to hear
And disregards the rest
-Paul Simon
User avatar
High Lord Tolkien
Excommunicated Member of THOOLAH
Posts: 7376
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 2:40 am
Location: Cape Cod, Mass
Been thanked: 3 times
Contact:

Post by High Lord Tolkien »

Fist and Faith wrote:
Skyweir wrote:That’s kinda debating 101 isn’t it?
Indeed it is. But we're not a debating club that requires all to follow certain rules and procedures. We're a site dedicated to a fantasy series/author, which also has a place for discussion of, among many other things, current events. So it all depends on each person's goals, and on how seriously they want to be taken by people who have different goals. I can claim the members of the US House of Representatives are changelings from Star Trek DS9. You can say I need to give evidence to support my claim. But I don't. I will if I want you to believe me. But if I don't care if you believe me, I'm done. In fact, I could tell you it's on you to prove me wrong. If you want me to believe I'm wrong, you're going to have to prove it to me.

I would not be surprised if everyone dismissed my claim very soon. I would have a good laugh at someone who actually started presenting evidence that I'm wrong. If I made such bizarre claims with any regularity, I would expect everybody to stop reading my posts entirely. I think it's somewhat Darwinian.

Still, I haven't broken any rules that all must agree upon before posting in Current Events.


I had a wrong interpretation of "misinformation." I guess if someone is misinformed, they will then innocently pass on that misinformation. There's no ill intent. Personally, I would say "That information is inaccurate."

However, I still say "propaganda" is an accusation of ill intent. Certainly, I see things a certain way, as we all do. So is it propaganda every time we give an opinion of anything?
Great post.
I totally agree.
That's how it should be, but it always ends up like this.... :trout:
Last edited by High Lord Tolkien on Sat Mar 04, 2023 5:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
https://thoolah.blogspot.com/

[Defeated by a gizmo from Batman's utility belt]
Joker: I swear by all that's funny never to be taken in by that unconstitutional device again!


Image Image Image Image
User avatar
Wosbald
A Brainwashed Religious Flunkie
Posts: 6084
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 1:35 am
Been thanked: 2 times

Post by Wosbald »

+JMJ+
Savor Dam wrote:
Fist and Faith wrote:Everybody say what you think. It you just want to state it as your opinion, and not try to support it, fine. If you want to try to convince someone else, go for it. If you want someone to support their statement, ask them to do so. If they don't, then you're not convinced. Eventually, maybe you'll stop reading posts by someone who never supports their position, or does so in ways you think are useless.
… By itself, the quote doesn't differ much from the rules originally set by the longer-serving mod prior to the Tank getting nuked …

[…]
What that really shows, IMO, is that the Essential Rule — the sine qua non, The One Rule to Rule Them All — is 'Just Don't Be an Asshole'.


Image


Image
User avatar
Fist and Faith
Magister Vitae
Posts: 23439
Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2002 8:14 pm
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 30 times

Post by Fist and Faith »

High Lord Tolkien wrote:That's how it should be, but.... :trout:
Brute!
Wosbald wrote:What that really shows, IMO, is that the Essential Rule — the sine qua non, The One Rule to Rule Them All — is 'Just Don't Be an Asshole'.
If only it was that easy. If only one person's "I'm presenting a logical argument" wasn't another's "You're being an asshole." So it all has to be spelled out.
All lies and jest
Still a man hears what he wants to hear
And disregards the rest
-Paul Simon
User avatar
wayfriend
.
Posts: 20957
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 12:34 am
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Post by wayfriend »

Fist and Faith wrote:wayfriend,

I should specify. I only mean declaring the intentions of another poster in the Current Events thread.
Okay.

But I was asking what Obi-Wan Obi-Wan Nihilo would want to do.

See, he posted that Wos should stop posting what is essentially pro-catholic propaganda "with no analysis or commentary" because "This is a discussion board".

And moments later asked that conservative propaganda be left alone, without anyone being allowed to say what it is.

I found that to be not only incredibly hypocritical but, more problematic, well on the way of establishing a marked bias - conservative crap okay, catholic crap not okay. And more ominously it sounds like others are agreeable.

So look. If the proper response to Jan 6 conspiracy theory crap is "I disagree. I think...", then the proper response to Wos posting Catholic crap is "I disagree. I think...". Anything else is simply a bias towards one side.

Lastly, people communicate in different ways. Some people are comfortable writing what their opinion is. Some people are not, and prefer to show what others have written and saying "That!". I think that allowing Obi-wan to normalize bias against a certain communication style is also harmful.

And there is a well established history in the Tank of mocking Wos for his religious observances, and this smacks of trying to resurrect that as normalized. But that's not cool.
.
User avatar
Fist and Faith
Magister Vitae
Posts: 23439
Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2002 8:14 pm
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 30 times

Post by Fist and Faith »

wayfriend, I believe my post four above yours combined with my post about quoting Hitler address most of what you're saying?
All lies and jest
Still a man hears what he wants to hear
And disregards the rest
-Paul Simon
User avatar
Wosbald
A Brainwashed Religious Flunkie
Posts: 6084
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 1:35 am
Been thanked: 2 times

Post by Wosbald »

+JMJ+
Fist and Faith wrote:[…]
Wosbald wrote:What that really shows, IMO, is that the Essential Rule — the sine qua non, The One Rule to Rule Them All — is 'Just Don't Be an Asshole'.
If only it was that easy. If only one person's "I'm presenting a logical argument" wasn't another's "You're being an asshole." So it all has to be spelled out.
Yeah, I'm quite familiar with the Tank Two-Step:

"The definition of Assholishness has not been sufficiently established. Therefore, in the absence of said definition, it cannot be logically demonstrated that I — or any of the other ostensible 'Assholes' — meet the objective standard for Wanton Assholery."


Image


Image
User avatar
Obi-Wan Nihilo
Still Not Buying It
Posts: 5904
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 3:37 pm
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Post by Obi-Wan Nihilo »

wayfriend wrote:
Fist and Faith wrote:wayfriend,

I should specify. I only mean declaring the intentions of another poster in the Current Events thread.
Okay.

But I was asking what Obi-Wan Obi-Wan Nihilo would want to do.

See, he posted that Wos should stop posting what is essentially pro-catholic propaganda "with no analysis or commentary" because "This is a discussion board".

And moments later asked that conservative propaganda be left alone, without anyone being allowed to say what it is.

I found that to be not only incredibly hypocritical but, more problematic, well on the way of establishing a marked bias - conservative crap okay, catholic crap not okay. And more ominously it sounds like others are agreeable.

So look. If the proper response to Jan 6 conspiracy theory crap is "I disagree. I think...", then the proper response to Wos posting Catholic crap is "I disagree. I think...". Anything else is simply a bias towards one side.

Lastly, people communicate in different ways. Some people are comfortable writing what their opinion is. Some people are not, and prefer to show what others have written and saying "That!". I think that allowing Obi-wan to normalize bias against a certain communication style is also harmful.

And there is a well established history in the Tank of mocking Wos for his religious observances, and this smacks of trying to resurrect that as normalized. But that's not cool.
There's nothing the least bit hypocritical about my statements.

Nevermind the fact that I don't believe there are any posters here who believe that Trump won the 2020 election.

But when incendiary language like, "misinformation" and "propaganda" are used, the user is typically assuming the intent of the original poster. Fist addressed this upthread, and he got exactly the point I was making.

But if someone were to make the claim that Trump won the 2020 election, it's really easy to post a link to all the various court cases and audits that prove that didn't happen. You can do that without flaming the poster. And you can follow up those links with the question, "so what makes you believe that?"

And then a conversation can ensue.

Regarding Wos's copy-and-past links....There's no discussion there. Wos has made the claim in more than one thread that his belief system isn't a belief system; it's the objective truth. Which, of course, it's not. Further, when other posters provide links to the abuses of his church, whether it's the systematic child sexual abuse, the cover-up of said abuses, hoards wealth rather than giving it all to the poor, or the fact that the country that houses his religious hierarchy allows no refugees, there's absolute silence.

So in his particular case, there's no effort or attempt to have a conversation. He's the equivalent of the family TC meets at the beginning of LFB.
Image
User avatar
wayfriend
.
Posts: 20957
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 12:34 am
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Post by wayfriend »

Fist and Faith wrote:wayfriend, I believe my post four above yours combined with my post about quoting Hitler address most of what you're saying?
Somewhat, but I still would like to say what I have to say.

But one thing about your post I will say: there is misinformation that is literally dangerous. And there are people who post that stuff intentionally and in full knowing. Someone who re-posts it is very ignorant or has an agenda. And it doesn't take long to see that they are not very ignorant.

So the question I ask myself is, am I just another "good man doing nothing"?
.
User avatar
Obi-Wan Nihilo
Still Not Buying It
Posts: 5904
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 3:37 pm
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Post by Obi-Wan Nihilo »

wayfriend wrote:
Fist and Faith wrote:wayfriend, I believe my post four above yours combined with my post about quoting Hitler address most of what you're saying?
Somewhat, but I still would like to say what I have to say.

But one thing about your post I will say: there is misinformation that is literally dangerous. And there are people who post that stuff intentionally and in full knowing. Someone who re-posts it is very ignorant or has an agenda. And it doesn't take long to see that they are not very ignorant.

So the question I ask myself is, am I just another "good man doing nothing"?
Here's the issue I have with that.

In May of 2020, espousing the "lab leak theory" was called misinformation, and people were being deplatformed over that. Now it's no longer misinformation, it's beginning to become consensus. There was an awful lot of Covid-related things that were derided as misinformation that now......Not so much.

Covid is but one example, but that sort of rhetoric - where a poster's motives are harshly judged - draws lines between posters and creates conflict. Not that I believe this, but what if a Deep Throat came out of the woodwork and showed clear, explicit, irrefutable evidence that Trump won the 2020 election? Or that 9/11 was, in fact, an inside job?

A lot of us would look pretty foolish, and a lot of the terrible things we've said to one another would have been for nothing.
Image
User avatar
Fist and Faith
Magister Vitae
Posts: 23439
Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2002 8:14 pm
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 30 times

Post by Fist and Faith »

wayfriend wrote:
Fist and Faith wrote:wayfriend, I believe my post four above yours combined with my post about quoting Hitler address most of what you're saying?
Somewhat, but I still would like to say what I have to say.
You, may, indeed, have your say. I just wanted to make sure you had seen my posts.

wayfriend wrote:But one thing about your post I will say: there is misinformation that is literally dangerous. And there are people who post that stuff intentionally and in full knowing. Someone who re-posts it is very ignorant or has an agenda. And it doesn't take long to see that they are not very ignorant.
Even if there are no possibilities beyond the two you mention, we do not have a system to decide which things that have been said are not allowed to be repeated.
All lies and jest
Still a man hears what he wants to hear
And disregards the rest
-Paul Simon
User avatar
wayfriend
.
Posts: 20957
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 12:34 am
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Post by wayfriend »

Obi-Wan Nihilo wrote:In May of 2020, espousing the "lab leak theory" was called misinformation, and people were being deplatformed over that. Now it's no longer misinformation, it's beginning to become consensus.
Nope. It's still misinformation. As is the misinformation that one government agency's "low confidence" assessment is more important than four other US agencies assessment that it wasn't a leak, not to mention even more organizations around the world also saying it wasn't. Cherry-picking is part and parcel with a misinformation campaign.

As is the misinformation that "people were deplatformed over that".

Of course, people who disseminate misinformation want you to think that one day their information will become accepted as fact. That's part and parcel as well.
.
User avatar
Obi-Wan Nihilo
Still Not Buying It
Posts: 5904
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 3:37 pm
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Post by Obi-Wan Nihilo »

wayfriend wrote:
Obi-Wan Nihilo wrote:In May of 2020, espousing the "lab leak theory" was called misinformation, and people were being deplatformed over that. Now it's no longer misinformation, it's beginning to become consensus.
Nope. It's still misinformation. As is the misinformation that one government agency's "low confidence" assessment is more important than four other US agencies assessment that it wasn't a leak, not to mention even more organizations around the world also saying it wasn't. Cherry-picking is part and parcel with a misinformation campaign.

As is the misinformation that "people were deplatformed over that".

Of course, people who disseminate misinformation want you to think that one day their information will become accepted as fact. That's part and parcel as well.
No, it's not misinformation. MSN is not a conservative source at all, so I'm not cherry-picking either. Whether or not it's, "low confidence" is immaterial. It's being discussed at the highest levels of our government which means that it's not misinformation - evidence is developing and people are looking into it.
Image
Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion Forum”