Open Mic Thread: Tell us your likes and dislikes of P&N

[sandorski]

I really hate being misquoted or misquoting someone. If I ever do it or have done it I would apologize immediately. I even hate the kinda cute ( FTFY ) that is so often used. I may be a jerk and abrasive at times, but I try not too be dishonest.

"ftfy" isn't really misquoting. It's a in your face kinda way of either to show the Absurdity of ones' post or to show the Quoters' opinion on the subject. It's not meant to imply the Quoteds' position is something else entirely(which is what Misquoting is all about).

 

[mrSHEiK124]

 

[Infohawk]

"ftfy" isn't really misquoting. It's a in your face kinda way of either to show the Absurdity of ones' post or to show the Quoters' opinion on the subject. It's not meant to imply the Quoteds' position is something else entirely(which is what Misquoting is all about).

I'm not surprised that you're defending it. FTFY is nonsense and is usually just putting words into people mouths. You don't get to say what other people's opinions are. Their own posts do that for them. It's a very lazy way to attack someone.

I doubt it should be disallowed but your defense of it is ridiculous.

 

[sandorski]

I'm not surprised that you're defending it. FTFY is nonsense and is usually just putting words into people mouths. You don't get to say what other people's opinions are. Their own posts do that for them. It's a very lazy way to attack someone.

I doubt it should be disallowed but your defense of it is ridiculous.

Oy vey! :\

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally Posted by sandorski
"ftfy" isn't really misquoting. It's a in your face kinda way of either to show the Absurdity of ones' post or to show the Quoters' opinion on the subject. It's not meant to imply the Quoteds' position is something else entirely(which is what Misquoting is all about).

I'm not surprised that you're defending it. FTFY is nonsense and is usually just putting words into people mouths. You don't get to say what other people's opinions are. Their own posts do that for them. It's a very lazy way to attack someone.

I doubt it should be disallowed but your defense of it is ridiculous.

The biggest offenders of misquotes and making up personal lies and attacks are the ones crying foul in here.

It's like Sylvester saying he hasn't done anything while he has Tweety's feather hanging out of his mouth.

Funny how the Mods never ever see that feather.

 

[JD50]

You have some users that do nothing but insult others, and are allowed to persist.

Other than that, this forum is an absolute cesspool of faux intellectuals debating about decisions on which they have no bearing in a world in which they have virtually no impact. So it's perfect, it protects the other forums, as it was designed to do.

thix x100000

 

[Doppel]

ftfy is extremely annoying to have it done to oneself, but I don't think it's dishonest. I've seen a couple of times somebody's quote changed without clearly stating it and that is obviously dishonest, but if you change their words around and make it obvious you did that, everybody then knows they have no ownership over what you've written anyway and it's the ftfyer who owns it.

 

[randomrogue]

If anything some people don't know how to use ftfy. You should bold the parts you changed.

 

[cybrsage]

...blah blah...I am always right...blah blah...

To lie, one must be saying something which is not true, and knowingly doing it. If someone says "Jane is at the store" since he knew Jane left for the store, but did not know Jane had already returned, the man is not lying.

We both know this, but you insist on pretending you do not. Therefor, since you say it is wrong for me to only post only a snippet, and Idontcare posted that exact same snippet (from which I directly copied mine), you either are holding a double standard or you think Idontcare is wrong to have posted the snippet which I directly copied.

You claim to want to use context, while ignoring the context in surrounding my directly copying the post of Idontcare.

Personally, I am leaning towards you holding a double standard. Idontcare's snippet (exactly the same as mine) is good since you like him. My snipped (exactly the same as Idontcare's) is bad since you do not like me.

I realize you will dismiss all I said, which is fine, you are allowed to refuse to understand.

 

[cybrsage]

I think changing someone's quote for brevity (provided you use snipped, or "...") is fine. Also, removing personal attacks, cursing, etc. should be fine as well.

 

[Bowfinger]

To lie, one must be saying something which is not true, and knowingly doing it. If someone says "Jane is at the store" since he knew Jane left for the store, but did not know Jane had already returned, the man is not lying.

We both know this, but you insist on pretending you do not. Therefor, since you say it is wrong for me to only post only a snippet, and Idontcare posted that exact same snippet (from which I directly copied mine), you either are holding a double standard or you think Idontcare is wrong to have posted the snippet which I directly copied.

You claim to want to use context, while ignoring the context in surrounding my directly copying the post of Idontcare.

Personally, I am leaning towards you holding a double standard. Idontcare's snippet (exactly the same as mine) is good since you like him. My snipped (exactly the same as Idontcare's) is bad since you do not like me.

I realize you will dismiss all I said, which is fine, you are allowed to refuse to understand.

You're lying again.

 

[Bowfinger]

I think changing someone's quote for brevity (provided you use snipped, or "...") is fine. Also, removing personal attacks, cursing, etc. should be fine as well.

How about changing someone's quote to, "...blah blah...I am always right...blah blah..."? Where does that fall in your hypocritical acceptability scale?

 

[cybrsage]

You're lying again.

How about changing someone's quote to, "...blah blah...I am always right...blah blah..."? Where does that fall in your hypocritical acceptability scale?

If you actually cared about context, you would not need to even ask the question. But since you obviously do not (as proven by the first quote), you asked the question.

We both know that you actually DO fully understand the context you took the quote out of, so we both know you actually already know the answer.

Bowfinger lies about it in 3...2...1...

 

[dank69]

Simply requesting the Forum Guidelines be followed.

AnandTech Forum Guidelines

Do not use our Forums to post any material, or links to any material, which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise violative of any law.

Thank you for an example of what should NOT be allowed in P&N; and something people find very unethical in the news world (though Fox and a few others use it constantly) - lying by omission. You conveniently ignored the sentence that follows immediately after what you quoted:

Special exception to the restrictions on vulgarity and profanity are granted ONLY in the social forums.

This type of dishonesty in discussions should not be allowed - it nearly invariably leads to unnecessary animosity in threads when others point out that the person's source doesn't even agree with their point.

Cybrsage, it was wrongly assumed that you were intentionally lying in your first post requesting that the guidelines be followed. This is mostly because you did not properly attribute you quote to IDC, but that is neither here nor there. What does matter is that you were informed of your error and then went on to post these:

Sure it does. You claimed things would be changed to "my personal tastes". You are wrong. Things would be changed to follow the AnandTech Forum Guidelines.

I quoted Idontcare. You may notice his post at the top of the previous page, where I quoted it from. So what you all just said, you said about him.

Congrats on all of you calling Idontcare a liar. Good job! :thumbsup:

In these posts you both repeat the same misinformation AFTER you were informed that it was not complete and refuse to admit that your original point was wrong, instead choosing to put words in other people's mouths.

 

[Whiskey16]

cybrsage, you are doing nothing now but sticking to your expected modus operandi of excessive argumenation.

You have lost the argument to vindicate yourself. You'd be best served by backing down rather than again excessively posting and attempting domination of a thread. In effect -- trolling and derailing.

When you surfaced in November, I presented a concise public summary and warning of who you were and what you would bring. In its entirety, that prediction came true, as your antagonistic dishonesty demonstrates among the most disruptive behaviour that forums may face.

For all too many years and presence upon various forums you have not changed. There is satisfaction in witnessing, over just a few months, your universally condemned implosion.

 

[randomrogue]

To add to Whiskey's post I have been searching through http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/index.htm trying to find the guy who tries to win through sheer volume of posting. Just because you post 1000 times doesn't mean you're right. You don't always have to get the last word. Just admit defeat and go on to the next thread. I keep checking this thread/forum seeing if there's anything interesting and half the time it's just cybrsage blowing up the forums. Even if you're right you can't win an argument by posting this much.

 

[waggy]

I would love to see the "fixed" quotes go away. that's pretty much it. some get out of control at times though. that needs to be reigned in.

pretty much i come here to hear both sides. The bias of some members is insane though and makes it hard.

 

[Juddog]

cybrsage is pretty much the standard definition of a forum troll.

I don't know how the mods tolerate it.

 

[cybrsage]

cybrsage, I am going to use my tried and true logical fallacy of poisoning the well, pretending it is an intelligent thing to do...

I fixed it for you. You do love your logical fallacies, don't you?


EDIT: I did it just for waggy.

 

[cybrsage]

To add to Whiskey's post I have been searching through http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/index.htm trying to find the guy who tries to win through sheer volume of posting. Just because you post 1000 times doesn't mean you're right. You don't always have to get the last word. Just admit defeat and go on to the next thread. I keep checking this thread/forum seeing if there's anything interesting and half the time it's just cybrsage blowing up the forums. Even if you're right you can't win an argument by posting this much.

Sigh....

OK, let us say you read something on this forum which is grossly incorrect, such as people saying the Law of Moses (aka Levitical Law) applies to non-Jews. Obviously, you would want to post a correction, since this simply is not true (non-Jews who voluntarily place themselves under The Law notwithstanding).

When you do this, you will get several people who all jump on you, each one saying something either completely hateful, or simply out of ignorance. Of course, you will need to correct the ones posting out of ignorance and you wil need to slap down the haters. At this point you are posting 5 replies. Each time you do this, they reply again, and you again have another 5 replies.

Builds up quickly.

We are all aware this is a left leaning board. That is glaringly obvious, and one of the reasons I started posting here. If you post something from a right leaning point of view, you will get many replies to it from many people. Each one will need to be replied to, and many conversations will take place.

Add to it the simple posts of "well said" and "I admit, I did laugh" when people say good or funny things. These things should not just be ignored.

This causes post count to rapidly increase.

I figured this would be obvious to everyone, but I was wrong, it needed to be explained.

 

[randomrogue]

Generally speaking your position should be able to be formulated within one post. In addition you shouldn't need to respond to every wackjob. You shouldn't have to answer every post. It's just too much from you. You realize that people who agree with you will be annoyed by the volume of posting right?

 

[BoberFett]

He is a PRIME candidate for the Troll removal tool imo.

Said the pot to the kettle...

 

[Juddog]

When you do this, you will get several people who all jump on you, each one saying something either completely hateful, or simply out of ignorance. Of course, you will need to correct the ones posting out of ignorance and you wil need to slap down the haters. At this point you are posting 5 replies. Each time you do this, they reply again, and you again have another 5 replies.

Builds up quickly.

No - what builds up people jumping on you is when you constantly omit context when quoting news items and other people, and purposefully attempt to dodge any response which points out where you were wrong.

After enough times doing this, you'll have both the left-leaning and right-leaning members of the board pouncing on you, which is exactly what is happening now. The mods even told you this directly and up front earlier in this very thread.

 

[cybrsage]

Generally speaking your position should be able to be formulated within one post. In addition you shouldn't need to respond to every wackjob. You shouldn't have to answer every post. It's just too much from you. You realize that people who agree with you will be annoyed by the volume of posting right?

The problem that arises is then they go about, in every thread, claiming you ran away from their post...or that you were incapable of responding.

I thought about using the multiquote feature...but I figured people would get confused too easily. Maybe not, though. What do you think about that option?

 

[umbrella39]

cybrsage, you are doing nothing now but sticking to your expected modus operandi of excessive argumenation.

You have lost the argument to vindicate yourself. You'd be best served by backing down rather than again excessively posting and attempting domination of a thread. In effect -- trolling and derailing.

When you surfaced in November, I presented a concise public summary and warning of who you were and what you would bring. In its entirety, that prediction came true, as your antagonistic dishonesty demonstrates among the most disruptive behaviour that forums may face.

For all too many years and presence upon various forums you have not changed. There is satisfaction in witnessing, over just a few months, your universally condemned implosion.

Good luck with him stopping. Disgruntled trolls grunt... 3000+ times in 2 months. This won't stop until the next inevitable ban and ALT.