Skip to main content

View Diary: Open Letter to Sockpuppets And Trolls (157 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  If the shoe fits.............. (4+ / 0-)

    If you want me to address the comments instead, here you go.  Why are the same comments always here, and why are they always made by the same people?   Why are they drawn like moths to a flame, and why are their comments always redundant, persistent, and indignant?

    I never address you, or knowingly enter into anything written by you or others like you.   I see no benefit in participating in a dialog with someone who is determined and always right.  Monsters, like all of life, are in the eye of the beholder.  Last I knew, nobody died and left you in charge.  

    What we need is a Democrat in the White House. Warren 2016

    by dkmich on Sun Nov 24, 2013 at 08:47:04 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  This comment (15+ / 0-)

      could be written to the diarist as well.

      Why the constant diaries about trolls and sockpuppets (which are an accompaniment to diary comments impugning others' motivations)?

      Why are these diaries always here and always made by the same people?  Why are they uprated by the same people?

      Why are these diaries redundant, persistent, and indignant.

      Always determined and "always right", otherwise there would be no basis from which to call others "trolls" instead of "people who disagree."

      No one died and left any diarist in charge.  

      •  Then stay out of his house (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        emal, angel d, Ray Pensador, lostinamerica

        If I go into your house and punch you in the nose, I can hardly claim self-defense.   Why do you all feel compelled and entitled to enter the homes of others and punch them in the nose????  

        If you don't like the food, go away.   Nobody is forcing you to enter a diary.   The rest of us are in there because we do like the food and we don't appreciate it when you have a seat at the table and spit on the food.

        To be civil and respectful of the rights of others to participate in dailykos the way they and admin see fit, I avoid people and diaries all of the time.   Nobody died and left me in charge.

        What we need is a Democrat in the White House. Warren 2016

        by dkmich on Sun Nov 24, 2013 at 01:33:44 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

          •  Well, there's this: (6+ / 0-)
            Honestly

            I don't understand why it's hard to ignore someone you don't like.

            by kos on Fri Nov 08, 2013 at 01:02:34 PM PST




            Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. ~ J. Garcia

            by DeadHead on Sun Nov 24, 2013 at 02:41:08 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  and this (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              serendipityisabitch, delphine
              Some users have asked about the ability to declare their diary off-limits to their detractors, so that they can discuss a topic without having opponents intrude. This would apply to internally contentious issues like Israel-Palestine, Snowden-NSA, and guns. Or primaries where the community is divided among the contenders.

              While I find some validity in the request, and considered it deeply, fact is it conflicts with the debate-centric focus of the site. We're not an echo chamber, nor do I want it to become one. So if you want to be spared dissent, Daily Kos just won't be the place for you. If you can't handle dissent, then maybe political activism is not the thing for you.

              There are indeed people who don't like Ray who crap in his diaries. Seen it. But there are other people who come here to disagree or debate who don't know Ray from Adam who don't necessarily like/dislike him. However, that dissent is often interpreted as "not like" as you just pointed out. And, its known that there posters in Ray's diaries who pounce on every comment that comes even close to disagreement. They are often the same ones who participate in endless battles on the Help Desk.
              •  Yeah, those people bug me, too. (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Ray Pensador

                You know what else really sticks in my craw?

                When people PM cryptic blog nanny messages threatening to run to the mods if a person doesn't stop calling people names, yet when pressed for further clarification as to what the heck they're even talking about, can't show enough courtesy to follow-up.

                I had that happen one time.




                Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. ~ J. Garcia

                by DeadHead on Sun Nov 24, 2013 at 05:56:25 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Ya, me too (0+ / 0-)

                  And another one...  when people draw fights from off blog to here, as you are apparently doing now or from one diary to another, or is involved in every poo flinging fest on the Help Desk, or has 12 fights going on with 12 different people at any given time. Ya, that might be a problem.

                  Now, lets get back on topic, shall we?  You seem to have a lot of trouble with that. You posted a link to one of Markos rules. And, so did I. Apparently you missed the distinction between the two - one is about people you don't like, the other is about people you disagree with. Apparently, you seem to have difficulty with the difference between the two and tend to conflate them.

                  •  Well... (0+ / 0-)

                    You're the only one dragging crap from diary-to-diary, considering YOU are the one who just posted a link to one of my comments I made to someone else in another post.

                    I was talking about an instance of a PM I got from someone here, out-of-the-blue, in the same vein as this part of your initial reply to me above:

                    And, its known that there posters in Ray's diaries who pounce on every comment that comes even close to disagreement. They are often the same ones who participate in endless battles on the Help Desk.
                    You get to drop hints, I get to drop hints.

                    Frankly, I'm tiring rather quickly of your games, the nature of which apparently hasn't changed all that much, even after your 18 month hiatus.

                    I know full well the difference between "not liking" and "disagreeing," okay?

                    I also know there are people who try to disguise their "not liking" someone as "disagreeing" in order to give themselves cover for going into the disliked diarist's diaries, continuously, to start shit.

                    And I also know there are people here who like to dismiss as "blindly loyal" or as "bouncers for the diarist" anyone who, after having witnessed it happen time after time, is able recognize the assholery when they see it.

                    Seeing that I'm somewhat of a regular in Ray's diaries, and had participated in his previous posts similar to this one, which were posted while you were still on your little break, I'm not really interested in how well you think I'm capable of staying on topic, especially in a meta diary.

                    Goodbye.




                    Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. ~ J. Garcia

                    by DeadHead on Sun Nov 24, 2013 at 10:43:01 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  And by the way... (0+ / 0-)

                      The blockquoted text, for which you omitted a link to provide context, was in reference to the request for official recognition of The Caucus Project group as a type of diary afforded the same protections and special community moderation rights as the other special community diaries like IGTNT.

                      Markos was addressing that request, and as it turns out, rejecting it. As I previously alluded, the comment section of that diary, had you chosen to link it, reveals the context absent from your comment above.

                      Again, you might not have been back yet, at the time the request was first made of him, and I don't recall you participating in the diary in which he wrote the blockquoted text, either.




                      Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. ~ J. Garcia

                      by DeadHead on Sun Nov 24, 2013 at 11:02:43 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Allow me to clarify (3+ / 0-)

                        You posted a Markos rule regarding how to deal with people you dislike. I posted a Markos rule regarding how deal with people you disagree with. Perhaps I should have added some context to my block quote, but the point was that some seem to conflate disagreement with dislike, and that was AdamB's point and others' point in this thread. I was simply showing how Markos' two rules address both: those you dislike, those you disagree with. You posted one, I posted the other.

                        If you go to the top of this thread, you'll see dkmich making the argument that people who dislike Ray should avoid his diaries. I actually agree with him. In fact, thats precisely what I do. There's a handful of people I do not go anywhere near their diaries. Never post in them. Never rate comments in them, etc. However, there are others who I don't agree on some issues where I occasionally comment in their diaries - Ray's are an example. I don't agree with his calls for revolution, and especially for the type of revolution he embraced when he first started writing diaries. I only occasionally comment in his diaries and I am not a regular in them. However, I've seen enough to know that he has some who truly dislike him and come into his diaries to stir the pot. And, there are others who come in to his diaries and disagree respectfully and get hammered by his defenders.

                        The blockquoted text, for which you omitted a link to provide context, was in reference to the request for official recognition of The Caucus Project group as a type of diary afforded the same protections and special community moderation rights as the other special community diaries like IGTNT.

                        Markos was addressing that request, and as it turns out, rejecting it. As I previously alluded, the comment section of that diary, had you chosen to link it, reveals the context absent from your comment above.

                        No.  The block quote I provided came from Markos' final draft of rules, not from some diary you linked to:

                        http://www.dailykos.com/...

                        Finally, two points:

                        I did make one mistake here and that was to chase you down the rabbit hole of going off topic when you brought up the issue of a PM. I should have ignored that as not relevant to this thread.

                        And two, I am constantly reminded that I was banned for quite some time. Upon my return, I diaried about it. I accepted full responsibility for it. Some insist I wear a hair shirt because of it with their constant reminders. I really don't mind. I'd prefer people judge me for my actions in the here and now. I suppose I know somewhat how ex-cons feel in a way.

          •  This diary is his house. It happens to be in (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Ray Pensador, lostinamerica, DeadHead

            Markos neighborhood.  Ray is playing by Markos rules.  See low.    If Markos has a problem with him, he'll let him know it.  Not you because nobody died and left you in charge either.

            The "guest in someone's house" rule

            Walking into someone's diary is like walking into someone's home. You are a guest. Act accordingly. That doesn't mean you can't disagree. It just means you have to be civil and courteous and limit your arguments to substance.

            That level of courtesy must be even higher in group diaries. If people want to hang out and talk about X, and you are anti-X, then either be on your bestest of best behavior or just stay away. You are always free to write your own response diary or start your own anti-X group.

            So, my tolerance for dickishness will be least in group diaries, followed by personal diaries, followed by your own diaries.

            Bottom line: If you don't like someone, ignore or argue PURELY on the facts. If you refuse to heed and seek out your foes to shit all over their diaries, I will zap you. You don't need to go after the same people every day to remind them that yes, you still don't like them.

            As I said, the easiest course is to ignore what you don't like or don't agree with.  Otherwise you just turn into a nag and a stalker and hijack everyone's diaries.   We should respect each other more than that.

            What we need is a Democrat in the White House. Warren 2016

            by dkmich on Sun Nov 24, 2013 at 02:52:36 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Hijacking ain't good. (9+ / 0-)

              But this diary is about meta, and the proper discourse within diaries.  And as you quoted:

              That doesn't mean you can't disagree. It just means you have to be civil and courteous and limit your arguments to substance.
              •  The barking is relentless. (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Ray Pensador, lostinamerica

                But they don't just disagree.  They disagree with his content, and they disagree with him - on everything, over and over and over.  Even substance,  when beaten to death, becomes oppressive at worst and spam at best.     A good guest is sensitive to their host, careful not impose, and never overstays their welcome.

                Why is this a fight that needs to be had????  

                What we need is a Democrat in the White House. Warren 2016

                by dkmich on Sun Nov 24, 2013 at 03:16:33 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Since his diaries (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Hey338Too, Cedwyn, fcvaguy

                  all have the same content, then it must seem like "we" disagree over and over - nope, it's the same disagreement with the same subject, over and over.

                  How anyone with the slightest degree of self-awareness can actually miss the irony in "Even substance, when beaten to death, becomes oppressive at worst and spam at best" in yet another "the world is overrun with trolls and shlls!" diary by Ray . . .

                  Well, it's mind boggling, really.

                  Many of us have been the target of these jabs and accusations.  We've had (in my case) a decade of goodwill here, enjoyed ourselves. Felt free to disagree or agree, wherever our hearts and minds took us.  (Except I/P, of course - a problem of the planet, not dkos)

                  And suddenly there are the accusations.  The complete loss of the compassion of those we thought our peers.  They are aggrieved by behavior they treat us to, be we are disingenuous if we express that we are also aggrieved.

                  We're accused of lying, or being something we are not, of believing things we don't, of having misrepresented ourselves for years, our expressions discarded as artifice, of being too dull and naive to notice our minds have been clouded by someone else's manipulations - or that we are doing the manipulation ourselves.

                  Our comments no longer respected, but instead jeered and attacked.

                  And so yeah, every time we see this SAME set of accusations and recriminations, we react the SAME way.  It's wrong.  Ray is wrong.  We disagree with "his content" and we disagree with HIM every single time he says this same thing which is often.

                  Too often.

                  •  Quick question... And this is a no-brainer: (0+ / 0-)

                    First, I've written over 500 diaries.  I sometimes even write about a walk in the park, and share photos!

                    Either way, if you feel so aggrieved, why are you here?  Don't you think that's a logical question.  Read your post again.  It's a pretty damning picture of Ray Pensador, right?

                    By golly, here's what I think about you... I think that you've often come to my diaries and mischaracterized me (as in this post I'm responding to).  No, I understand that that is a matter of perception... You may very well be writing those things because deep down inside you believe them; but again, if you think those terrible things about me, why are you here?

                    When was the last time you saw me in one of your diaries?  Probably never, right?  And you know why?  Because of opinion I've developed from your posts in my diaries.

                    It is truly kind of bizarre that you would keep coming to my diaries if you have such a negative opinion of me, IMHO.

                    •  Ray, the thing is... (4+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      delphine, Cedwyn, fcvaguy, kj in missouri

                      ... it's not PERSONAL.  If the premise of a diary is a repeat of something that someone has disagreed with in the past, then that person has the right to disagree as many times as the premise is proposed.  Rinse, lather, repeat.  That's all there is to it.  

                      You can say the same thing over and over, and people can disagree with you every time you say what you've already said.  QED.

                      Looking through the bent backed tulips, To see how the other half lives, Looking through a glass onion - John Lennon and Paul McCartney

                      by Hey338Too on Sun Nov 24, 2013 at 07:14:07 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  How funny... Why would you think that this diary (0+ / 0-)

                        refers in any way to Delphine, you, or any of the other handful of "critics" who showed up (again)?

                        Why is this tiny group take so much umbrage to a diary like this?  I don't think I've accused any of them of being political hacks (paid or unpaid), sockpuppets, or trolls.

                        Why the loud protestations (by the same tiny group of people)?

                        I don't get it.

                        •  Could be the mention (3+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          Hey338Too, Cedwyn, erratic

                          of the "6" in response to a general comment about "ratfuckers" (trolls).

                          Same premise:  there are a bunch of trolls here!

                          Same response:  calm down, you're seeing bogey men in your fellow kossacks.

                        •  Umbrage and loud protestations - oh my (4+ / 0-)

                          I was responding to your comment by paraphrasing Delphine's excellent comment.  She's right.  Every time you write a diary with the same premise, the people who disagree with that premise have a right to speak - whether you like them or not.  It's not about you, it's about what you write - and that's exactly as it should be.

                          You have your own website (which you link to in every diary) where you can voice your opinion and ban anyone you wish who disagrees with you.  On this site, if I agree or disagree with a diary or a comment, I am allowed to do so without your (or your "Fab-30's") permission.  On this site, you actually have the right to read and comment on Delphine's diaries; the fact that you choose not to says more about you than it does her diaries - and that too is exactly as it should be.

                          Looking through the bent backed tulips, To see how the other half lives, Looking through a glass onion - John Lennon and Paul McCartney

                          by Hey338Too on Sun Nov 24, 2013 at 08:21:49 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  If I close my eyes I can hear that as an (0+ / 0-)

                            impassioned speech! The indignation; the almost saving-the-world (Daily Kos?) from (whatever) feels so real.  Very well done.

                            BTW, read what I always write.  If the fab-six is so disturbed with what I write, why do they keep visiting my diaries?  I think that's a logical question.

                            As to why I don't visit diaries of the fab-six, well, again, if I've formed a negative opinion of them, why would I have any interest in visiting their diaries when there are so many great writers here?

                            What does that say about me?  That I like to read good stuff, I guess?

                            Okay, I think we're done here.  Moving on.  We'll continue in my next diary, maybe?

                          •  "BTW, read what I always write." (0+ / 0-)

                            ROTFLMAO

                            Now we're done here!

                            Looking through the bent backed tulips, To see how the other half lives, Looking through a glass onion - John Lennon and Paul McCartney

                            by Hey338Too on Sun Nov 24, 2013 at 08:52:19 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Yep. We are. (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Ray Pensador, TheMomCat

                            And those of us familiar with your username will be expecting you next time there's a diary that questions all the center-right views you espouse.

                            Or one that talks about sockpuppets.

                            Because you are, indeed, somewhat of a regular in Ray's diaries. If not by actual comments you post, by your silent tips of comments made by others who, coincidentally, are on the opposite side of Ray in any given subthread.

                            And you also happen to be someone who got NR'd for uprating a slur made about Ray in a completely unrelated diary in which he wasn't even present to defend himself.

                            So I think you might have some credibility issues when it comes to passing judgement on this particular diarist.




                            Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. ~ J. Garcia

                            by DeadHead on Sun Nov 24, 2013 at 11:29:17 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Perhaps the answer lies in the fact... (9+ / 0-)

                            ...that people aren't just talking to you when they write a comment; they are talking to whoever is here: lurkers; new visitors; people who haven't visited your diaries before.

                            It so happens that I don't disagree with everything in your diaries. In fact, I agree with a lot of what's in them. But I don't see much of anything new in those diaries. And other than a general call to activism—which large numbers of Kossacks are already engaged in across a broad range of issues—which you present in a know-it-all tone that often has an implicit undercurrent of I-can-see-it-why-can't-you-all, I don't see much in the way of specifics in that call.

                            I don't know about your other raders, but I want something concrete, some substantial, something that says this (or that) should be the target of our actions. The list of possibilities is long, from police brutality to the cessation of fossil fuel extraction and burning, from populist economic restructuring to an end of imperial foreign policy. Which of those matter most in your view, and what kind of actions will most likely bear fruit?  

                            Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

                            by Meteor Blades on Sun Nov 24, 2013 at 10:59:05 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  MB, I don't know but something tells me that if (0+ / 0-)

                            I made it a habit to write diaries criticizing Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, or Virginia Foxx, among others, all of the sudden these very high standards you've postulated here for my diaries would vanish... What do you think?

                            Nevertheless, I would encourage you to take a look at these diaries:

                            1. Kick-starting The Rebellion: Innovative Ways of Supporting The Movement at The Grass-roots Level
                            2. I'm Spending The Biggest Shopping Day of The Year at Walmart!
                            3. The SF Mission District: Standing Up Against Gentrification And Evictions
                            4. My Experience At Occupy Oakland's 2nd Anniversary Rally Today
                            5. "Rise Up, Shut it Down, Oakland is The People's Town"

                            And I think you are familiar with the network of activists I'm been trying to organize; I think I have about 425 people who have signed up to my email list.

                            Regarding this:

                            But I don't see much of anything new in those diaries. And other than a general call to activism—which large numbers of Kossacks are already engaged in across a broad range of issues—which you present in a know-it-all tone that often has an implicit undercurrent of I-can-see-it-why-can't-you-all, I don't see much in the way of specifics in that call.
                            Many have said the same thing about much of what dominates the front page, although I don't usually engage in that criticism because thus far I've felt free to write about things that interest me.

                            And this:

                            I don't know about your other raders, but I want something concrete, some substantial, something that says this (or that) should be the target of our actions...
                            MB, as much as I would want to save the world, in reality I'm just one of many diarists here.  I believe I'm doing that which you said I'm not, but either way, don't you think you are setting up a pretty high bar for me...

                            I'm just some dude writing stuff.  People can choose to read what I write, or not, and if I make suggestions, people can choose to collaborate with me or not.

                            Finally, don't we have a pretty good system here to incentivize writers?  There is the rec list, tips, followers, etc., right?

                          •  Ray... here's an example.... (4+ / 0-)

                            Yesterday (or the day before?) you wrote a diary where you pushed local currency as a solution to some issues you raised. I understand what it is, but not a lot about how it can work. So, I asked a question or two, and others asked the same questions about how you would buy a car with local currency or pay your taxes with local currency to ensure you're able to collect Social Security in the future, etc. You didn't address any of those questions. If you're an expert on local currency, and embrace it as a solution, perhaps you could patiently explain how it would work? I think thats the type of thing Meteor Blades is talking about.

                          •  Yes, I better go to vet school now and get it (0+ / 0-)

                            over with in case I ever write a diary about rescuing dogs from shelters, so I'm ready to answer the obvious follow question demanding I tell exactly how to neuter dogs, step by step.

                          •  I don't think its quite that bad (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            erratic
                        •  Awesome Ray! (4+ / 0-)

                          You managed to deny accusing your tiny handful of critics while implicitly accusing them in the same comment. It's like an Escher sketch.

                  •  Target??? Quit standing in front of the gun. (0+ / 0-)

                    The obnoxious behavior I see the most is epitomized in the Ted Rall diary.   We do have a bunch of tyrants who think they order people about because HIM/HER does like it .   Just what on planet earth makes them think they are entitled to do that?

                    What we need is a Democrat in the White House. Warren 2016

                    by dkmich on Mon Nov 25, 2013 at 04:57:52 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Which (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      stellaluna, kkkkate

                      Ted Rall diary?

                      I don't believe I participated in that one.

                      No one is entitled to order people around because they don't like a person.

                      Used to be no one was entitled to even obliquely posit that people who disagree with you were trolls or shills, or to posit CT about a horde of trolls and shills here at Dkos.

                      That rule went out the window due to the NSA story, which apparently unleashed a great deal of paranoia that went beyond the NSA's activities to anyone who didn't share the same degree of angst over it.

                      We became targets.  Yeah, I know, we are bullies who made it impossible for the dozens of diaries to be posted and for people to express themselves in 1,000s of comments.  

                      No, wait a minute . . . .

                      In those diaries I was accused of being a troll, shill, NSA "apologists", authoritarian, I can't even remember all of the rest of the "attacks" I withstood by simply stating my opinion.  

                      Then I was followed by a few folks (including some rather well known 'friends' of Ray) who came into unrelated diaries and jeered at my comments, jeered even when I agreed with their viewpoints, generally violated the DBAD rule, etc.

                      Bullies.  Ridiculous, childish bullies.  Meantime I'd been here 9 years with virtually total goodwill, well respected, etc.  

                      And funny enough, several other long-time well-respected Kossacks took the same beating, the same accusations, for months.  They wanted to autoban us!  They posted pictures of trolls (that upset me so much that I issued my first hidden comment ever.)

                      Many stopped posting for a while.  

                      I think jeering and following is obnoxious.  I think bullying and high fiving is obnoxious.  I think drumming people out of diaries, off this site, with mean-spirited bullshit, or constantly implying or outright saying that anyone who disagrees is either nefarious or hapless - those are obnoxious.

                      Acting like a victim after victimizing people is obnoxious.  Feeling aggrieved but being unable to empathize with others with similar feelings - obnoxious.  

                      What on planet earth makes people think they are entitled to do that?

            •  You just shifted from "don't like" to "disagree (4+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Hey338Too, fcvaguy, delphine, Cedwyn

              with". Are you saying Meteor Blades shouldn't have posted in this diary, because he disagrees with something in the diary?

              Whether you agree with a diary can not be a factor in whether you post in it - unless we change to having a statue of Narcissus in the header.

              At least half the future I've been expecting hasn't gotten here yet. Sigh.... (Yes, there's gender bias in my name; no, I wasn't thinking about it when I signed up. My apologies.)

              by serendipityisabitch on Sun Nov 24, 2013 at 03:02:49 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Of course not. (3+ / 0-)

                I am asking how many times can one disagree and not be a bore?  

                What we need is a Democrat in the White House. Warren 2016

                by dkmich on Sun Nov 24, 2013 at 03:28:02 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  At least as many times as someone posits the (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Hey338Too, fcvaguy, delphine

                  same premise, and fails to make the case for it.

                  Most, though I grant you not all, of the comments in these diaries are on point to the arguments made specifically in each of them. That they one and all seem to make no impact on the author does not mean that the points originally stated are valid.

                  At least half the future I've been expecting hasn't gotten here yet. Sigh.... (Yes, there's gender bias in my name; no, I wasn't thinking about it when I signed up. My apologies.)

                  by serendipityisabitch on Sun Nov 24, 2013 at 03:40:38 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  In whose opinion? (0+ / 0-)

                    They are arguing their opinions, not facts in evidence.   How many links are in comments contesting Ray's linked statements in the diary.  Later I will give you a current link that shows the hypocrisy of some of the complainers in his diaries. I'm on an iPhone this minute.

                    What we need is a Democrat in the White House. Warren 2016

                    by dkmich on Mon Nov 25, 2013 at 12:39:18 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Look, Ray is arguing his opinion, not a proven (3+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      stellaluna, erratic, Cedwyn

                      case. Part of the problem is that he brings up links which bear on something to do with the same subject he's trying to prove without actually making any causal link between his thesis and the material on the links.

                      This is the reason that most of the time people argue logic, not links, in these diaries. I'm quite sure that the links are interesting, and viable. The fact is, though, they don't have much connection to the basic argument here; which seems to be "Trolls beware! The world is changing. You're doomed."  And once again it ends up defining a [bad name!] as anyone who comes into a Pensador diary and argues with him.

                      Look, this diary started off with a bad misquote of an incredibly well known Shakespearian line. Okay, so Ray doesn't read Shakespeare. But if that quote isn't cited properly, or in context (and it wasn't), then what does that say about the rest of Ray's cites? He would say, and has said in previous diaries, that those types of questions are tangential to the diary, and not relevant to the main point, so he's not going to bother to answer.

                      It's relevant, and it's crucial. It speaks to the integrity of the diarist. If he cannot, in an area which is common for his audience, be bothered to get his citations correct, or show their relevance correctly, what can we infer about those citations in areas which are not common knowledge?

                      At least half the future I've been expecting hasn't gotten here yet. Sigh.... (Yes, there's gender bias in my name; no, I wasn't thinking about it when I signed up. My apologies.)

                      by serendipityisabitch on Mon Nov 25, 2013 at 07:22:53 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Let's see. I can prove beyond reasonable doubt (0+ / 0-)

                        that the premise of your post is faulty.  Notice the opening paragraph of the diary:

                        Have you heard the saying "thou doth protest too much?"  Here's the actual urban dictionary definition: Overly insistent about something, to the point where the opposite is most likely true.
                        Here's the link of he Urban Dictionary entry:
                        http://www.urbandictionary.com/...

                        Now, do you know why I specifically wrote that I was using the quote in the context in which the Urban Dictionary uses it?  Take a wild guess... Because I knew the Shakespeare reference and I wanted to make sure I was using a different context...

                        Look at the context: Overly insistent about something, to the point where the opposite is most likely true.

                        And do you know why that definition is in the Urban Dictionary?  It makes reference to the fact that sometimes a good sign to determine whether someone is a bad actor (i.e., acting in bad faith) is when that person "protests too much" when their actions are called into question.

                        How are we doing with the logic?  Hopefully, we're keeping up...

                        Now, notice something.  Here (once again), you first erroneously point out that I wasn't even aware of the meaning of the quote I used... You construct the attack one step at a time, carefully.  You first take a dig by writing that "Ray doesn't read Shakespeare." Right?

                        Then you go on to assert that since I'm allegedly misusing and misunderstanding a famous Shakespeare's quote, the rest of my citations are questionable:

                        But if that quote isn't cited properly, or in context (and it wasn't), then what does that say about the rest of Ray's cites?
                        And then you go for (what you think is the) coup de grace:
                        It's relevant, and it's crucial. It speaks to the integrity of the diarist. If he cannot, in an area which is common for his audience, be bothered to get his citations correct, or show their relevance correctly, what can we infer about those citations in areas which are not common knowledge?
                        I've mentioned before (because of the multiple times you keep doing this in my diaries) that it seems to me that you are trying to malign my character.  In a recent diary you made allusions about me being paranoid.  In this one you question my integrity based on what you erroneously identify my failure to understand a quote.

                        Finally, and again, after I've asked you this question dozens of times: Why do you keep clicking on to my diaries and posting several messages trying to malign my character?

                        In this very diary you've posted several messages (way more than me--think about that).

                        You've answered that you keep visiting my diaries and posting these types of messages because you are fascinated by me.

                        And I've said that I find that fascination kind of creepy, given the fact that you have gone as far as to track down diaries I've unpublished and post links to them in unrelated diaries' threads.

                        Again, why so much interest?  How many times have I visited a commented in your diaries.  I think once, right?

                        It is up to you... If you have such bad opinion of my writing and my character, it seems to me that you would avoid clicking on to my diaries.  I think that what reasonable people do here, mostly.

                        But if you continue visiting my diaries and posting these types of messages, then it is you who end up looking bad.

                        •  Ah. I will remember: The Urban Dictionary (0+ / 0-)

                          trumps Shakespeare.

                          Score one for HumptyDumptyisms.

                          “When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’

                          ’The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’

                          ’The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master — that’s all.”

                          Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass

                          At least half the future I've been expecting hasn't gotten here yet. Sigh.... (Yes, there's gender bias in my name; no, I wasn't thinking about it when I signed up. My apologies.)

                          by serendipityisabitch on Tue Nov 26, 2013 at 12:15:11 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  That's kind of bizarre, don't you think? Is that (0+ / 0-)

                            your answer?  Is that really your take from what I wrote: that I'm saying that the urban dictionary trumps Shakespeare, or is that just a way to avoid admitting you were wrong?  Weren't we talking about integrity?  You were questioning mine, weren't you?

                            Let me try this... Do you still stand by what you wrote:

                            But if that quote isn't cited properly, or in context (and it wasn't), then what does that say about the rest of Ray's cites?
                            It's relevant, and it's crucial. It speaks to the integrity of the diarist. If he cannot, in an area which is common for his audience, be bothered to get his citations correct, or show their relevance correctly, what can we infer about those citations in areas which are not common knowledge?
                            Or were you in error?  Could you answer that question directly?
            •  Oh no, you are talking common sense now. n/t (0+ / 0-)
            •  agree with this (0+ / 0-)
              We should respect each other more than that.
              This is a serious problem. If this was fixed, a lot of of other problems would be fixed.
        •  I don't (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Cedwyn, fcvaguy

          consider responding to the subject of the diary nor to any of the comments, in a substantive manner, "spitting on the food".

          Is it true that Ray writes a lot of diaries about trolls, shills, sockpuppets, unwittingly misled pawns?

          Is it true that these diaries tend to be uprated by the same people?  

          Are these diaries redundant?  persistent?  indignant?

          Has the diarist often insisted that those who disagree are simply "wrong", on the wrong side of history, on the wrong side of right and wrong?  Complete with photos?

          Yes, to all of it yes.  

          So, if I see a comment such as yours, which includes the "who died and put you in charge" stroppiness, how do I violate any Dkos rules to respond, point for point?

          It's okay to display any sort of dickishness one want as long as one is on the same side as the diarist?

          •  I believe it is a vicious cycle. (0+ / 0-)

            They harass, he responds.  He responds, they respond, and off we go.   Why is it so hard for people to quit fighting?    If I'm in your home and you don't like the way I am acting, you get to tell me to leave.   If your in your home and I don't like the way you are acting, I don't get to tell you to stop - I get to leave.   What's so hard about that?

            A comment or two, fine; but over and over with the same person by the same persons - is there really a point?

            Ted Rall's diary is a case in point.   Let me add to it  the people they have ganged up on and chased off:  Cenk Ygur, David Sirota, Greg Palast, and the run they made at OPOL, the DFH that criticizes Democrats.  A few of us supported OPOL just like I'm supporting Ray, and they backed off.    

            Ask this same group how they felt when people would visit the romance diaries that BlackWaterDog always had on the rec. list.   These same people attacked and justified attacking anyone who dared to criticize her or her content in her diaries or anywhere else on this blog.  She and her fans gave birth to the behavior that is now dubbed "rox and sux" on this site.  

            All I ask of those people is to leave him alone in his own diaries.  

            What we need is a Democrat in the White House. Warren 2016

            by dkmich on Mon Nov 25, 2013 at 05:18:19 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I think (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              kkkkate

              he needs to come clean about who he thinks are shills and trolls and/or stop claiming it without proof.

              If you don't want people to criticize what you say in a public forum, don't post it in a public forum.

              I don't know anything about a Ted Rall diary.

              As far as I'm concerned, there is no such thing as "roxx/suxx", and frankly I was pretty sick of hearing it after a while.

              I wrote a diary in 2011 about how MY comments CRITICIZING the President were being taken as "hatred" and that this was unfair.

              Fast forward and my lack of hysteria surrounding the NSA issue was taken as "roxx", that I was an Obama apologist, fangirl, blinded by the cult of personality, blah blah fucking blah, right?

              Now how can I be an apologist or fangirl of someone whose behavior I blasted myself?  

              I disagreed about the reaction to one issue, and was smeared on the road.  I even linked to my previous diary  there was actually a complaint because I posted a link and expected people to you know, click on it or some such craziness.

              Mean spiritedness, totally uncalled for.  If there is someone here who thinks the President is angelic and can do no wrong, I've yet to come across him or her.

              When I see comments like "he's incompetent and a liar, and an incompetent liar" and read how he totally betrayed us and is purposefully ushering in a police state, sure, I'm probably going to disagree.  That doesn't make me a "roxx", it makes me a person with a mind of her own.

              The whole idea of Roxx/Suxx insults all of us because it implies we are mindlessly on one side or the other instead of thoughtful people with informed and nuanced viewpoints and just disagree.

              There is no "side" because none of us are brainless purists.  

              Let's just agree there is shit slinging on both sides, and culprits as well as innocent folks getting hit with it.

              If I tell you I am genuine in what I am saying and why I am saying it, and about how I feel, and I am not telling you that you can't express your genuine thoughts or feelings, then that should be sufficient to shut people up about my being a troll, a shill, a liar, an apologist, a bully or tyrant . . . or roxx or suxx.

              We're all just sick of diaries about shills because we were accused of being shills!  And sick of diaries that are veiled accusations that we are shills.  Or diaries that are about shills but couched in some other subject.

              We didn't all suddenly become trolls.  And if you read the freaking comments I think you'll have a hard time finding many that think Obama is flawless.

              In fact, a lot of people throw in a dig or two in every comment just to avoid being slammed as a fanboy.

              Ridiculous.  

              •  I don't think he knows who or if.... (0+ / 0-)

                I think he's wondering out loud what's going on.

                You cannot deny that there are shills and trolls on the internet.   Are any of them here?  Hell if I know.  If you would have asked me a year ago if the NSA was spying on me or dailykos or if the country considered environmentalists as terrorists, I would have told you don't be crazy.

                Somebody has got to walk away.   If he can't even be in his own diaries, what does that leave him.   Why does he have to leave to be left alone.  This place is plenty big enough to share and easily avoid the people you want to avoid.   Just saying.    

                What we need is a Democrat in the White House. Warren 2016

                by dkmich on Mon Nov 25, 2013 at 03:17:28 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

              •  Being slammed as a fan boy is just (0+ / 0-)

                like being slammed  as an Obama hater.  Nobody likes it, and ultimately how much can one actually care what someone on the internet thinks about them?    Somebody has got to walk away.  

                They have neutral corners in a boxing ring for a  purpose.   I just wish the brawlers would spend more time in them.  

                What we need is a Democrat in the White House. Warren 2016

                by dkmich on Mon Nov 25, 2013 at 03:28:01 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

    •  dialogUE, dammit (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      erratic

      dialogUE

      may bill gates forever rot for that one.

      Please don't dominate the rap, Jack, if you got nothin' new to say - Grateful Dead

      by Cedwyn on Mon Nov 25, 2013 at 04:43:08 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site