NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.rickross.com/reference/brainwashing/brainwashing11.html

http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/Assets/rebelleader.jpg
This site here should be a very useful tool for all underdogs here in the struggle against the massive circle jerk. If every poster can spot manipulative behaviors then eventually the manipulative flame warriors will be given no other alternative than to cease and desist this underhanded behavior and succumb to the ways of true debate. I have witnessed as many netizens fell to these curs, with this handy information good model netizens can fight back.

I made you post this.

I made you post this.

Don't hog all the credit. sheesh. :rolleyes:

http://www.rickross.com/reference/brainwashing/brainwashing11.html

*snip pic*

This site here should be a very useful tool for all underdogs here in the struggle against the massive circle jerk. If every poster can spot manipulative behaviors then eventually the manipulative flame warriors will be given no other alternative than to cease and desist this underhanded behavior and succumb to the ways of true debate. I have witnessed as many netizens fell to these curs, with this handy information good model netizens can fight back.

I just skimmed the article you linked to.

The connection with your "thesis" is very tenuous. Here is the last paragraph:

I've presented the principal tactics that covert-aggressives use to manipulate and control others. They are not always easy to recognize. Although all aggressive personalities tend to use these tactics, covert-aggressives generally use them slickly, subtly and adeptly. Anyone dealing with a covertly aggressive person will need to heighten gut-level sensitivity to the use of these tactics if they're to avoid being taken in by them.

To which I say, heightening any further your gut-level sensitivity to aggression will likely land you in a mental institution.

On the contrary, you should grow a thicker skin.

Try again. Perhaps some subject other than "NSG are all circle-jerks but I'm a model netizen" because that is only going to get you teased.

Mercilessly.

I just skimmed the article you linked to.

The connection with your "thesis" is very tenuous. Here is the last paragraph:



To which I say, heightening any further your gut-level sensitivity to aggression will likely land you in a mental institution.

On the contrary, you should grow a thicker skin.

Try again. Perhaps some subject other than "NSG are all circle-jerks but I'm a model netizen" because that is only going to get you teased.

Mercilessly.

For cripe sake, you can't deny that many of those control tactics are used here against other posters (which isn't limited to just me by the way).

help help I'm being repressed!

help help I'm being repressed!

haha nice try. :rolleyes:

Shaming – This is the technique of using subtle sarcasm and put-downs as a means of increasing fear and self-doubt in others. Covert-aggressives use this tactic to make others feel inadequate or unworthy, and therefore, defer to them. It's an effective way to foster a continued sense of personal inadequacy in the weaker party, thereby allowing an aggressor to maintain a position of dominance.

Vilifying the Victim – This tactic is frequently used in conjunction with the tactic of playing the victim role. The aggressor uses this tactic to make it appear he is only responding (i.e. defending himself against) aggression on the part of the victim. It enables the aggressor to better put the victim on the defensive.

Returning again to the story of Jenny and Amanda, when Amanda accuses her mother of "hating" her and "always saying mean things" to her, she not only invites Jenny to feel the "bully," but simultaneously succeeds in "bullying" Jenny into backing off. More than any other, the tactic of vilifying the victim is a powerful means of putting someone unconsciously on the defensive while simultaneously masking the aggressive intent and behavior of the person using the tactic.

Minimization – This tactic is a unique kind of denial coupled with rationalization. When using this maneuver, the aggressor is attempting to assert that his abusive behavior isn't really as harmful or irresponsible as someone else may be claiming. It's the aggressor's attempt to make a molehill out of a mountain.

For cripe sake, you can't deny that many of those control tactics are used here against other posters (which isn't limited to just me by the way).

Sure, it's a power struggle if you want to see it that way.

You really think pointing at the use of such tactics is going to shame us all into acting like saints and scientists in debate?

It's NSG, mate. Love it or leave it!

What exactly is your point here? Do you have some examples of people using these so-called "circle jerk" tactics? Are you just whining, or do you have a legitimate point huddled somewhere inside this thread?

Here's what I've learned about manipulative people.

They aren't the people who have the frown or snarl on their face. They're the people with the smile on their face and the dagger behind their backs.

Sure, it's a power struggle if you want to see it that way.

You really think pointing at the use of such tactics is going to shame us all into acting like saints and scientists in debate?

It's NSG, mate. Love it or leave it!

NSG is a forum dedicated to unbiased, indifferent, scientific debate. Such tactics should have no place here.

help help I'm being repressed!
Bloody peasant.

What exactly is your point here? Do you have some examples of people using these so-called "circle jerk" tactics? Are you just whining, or do you have a legitimate point huddled somewhere inside this thread?

The ones listed in the article are commonly used here. I will point them out as examples as they come and I urge others to do so in order to allow scientific unbiased debate.

Huh. So by not actually formulating an argument, but forcing other posters to come up with examples that fit your viewpoint, you're not being manipulative?

The ones listed in the article are commonly used here. I will point them out as examples as they come and I urge others to do so in order to allow scientific unbiased debate.

So, is that the purpose of this thread? As we come across passive-agressive or just plain agressive posts, we should repost them here to inform others of the use of these tactics? Are we supposed to discuss the legitimacy of the tactics mentioned in the article? What sort of discussion did you intend to have with this thread?

So, is that the purpose of this thread? As we come across passive-agressive or just plain agressive posts, we should repost them here to inform others of the use of these tactics? Are we supposed to discuss the legitimacy of the tactics mentioned in the article? What sort of discussion did you intend to have with this thread?

No, just point out that you are on to their childish game and that it will not work. They'll stop after a while. The purpose of this thread was to present information and how it applies to posters on NSG.

Huh. So by not actually formulating an argument, but forcing other posters to come up with examples that fit your viewpoint, you're not being manipulative?

I argued that there are manipulative posters who employ certain tactics which coerce posters into a certain way of thinking and subtly abusing posters. I also argue that such behavior is intolerable.

And secondly I'm not forcing other posters to do anything. They have used those tactics in the past, are still using them so on their own accord, I don't see how I'm being manipulator since the manipulative posters have exhibited this behavior for quite a while with or without me doing anything.

http://www.rickross.com/reference/brainwashing/brainwashing11.html

http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/Assets/rebelleader.jpg
This site here should be a very useful tool for all underdogs here in the struggle against the massive circle jerk. If every poster can spot manipulative behaviors then eventually the manipulative flame warriors will be given no other alternative than to cease and desist this underhanded behavior and succumb to the ways of true debate. I have witnessed as many netizens fell to these curs, with this handy information good model netizens can fight back.

WTF is your fascination with Rick Ross and fears of brainwashing?

Regardless, providing accurate information that contradicts your bullshit is not underhanded or manipulative, it is called debating. Perhaps you will try it some day.

WTF is your fascination with Rick Ross and fears of brainwashing?

Regardless, providing accurate information that contradicts your bullshit is not underhanded or manipulative, it is called debating. Perhaps you will try it some day.

Where were you when I was informing the NSG populace of the horrors the cult experience I went through? Know that I HATE brainwashing and after the experiences I have had I regard it as an unforgivable evil and will stand up against it whenever and wherever it arises.

The second part of your post is overtly biased proves my point. Accurate information has sources, and presenting information is not the same as attacking the poster in an attempt to either coerce them into a certain view or shame them for the responders pleasure. Presenting information =\= personal attacks. Debates are civil and indifferent, many I go to are ridiculously one-sided and kept that way by a mob of net zealots.

With me alone most of the responses I get involve twisting my words and sly attempts to shame and according to the Ross site coerce me into a certain view. Something which I know how to resist well due to similar experiences I had with fundies in the past. I have noticed similar behavior aimed towards others who have disagreed with certain posters who in turn were forced to flee from the manipulator's cyber wrath.

Fixed:



Link it for you? Hell no, I'm an evil manipulative bitch. I want to see you disappointed far and wide in your search.

Though I will give you a hint. Sites dedicated to a single issue, like poultry-farming or immigrant-bashing, will give you a fair hearing and a decent debate on any other issue.

Here, we just like to win. Sorry you weren't getting satisfaction.

General For discussion and debate about anything.

Hmmm after reading that and the NS FAQ and the rules I'm inclined to disagree. This forum was meant for civil political debate, I barely find covert abuse civil nor do I find the "I want to win regardless" ideal fitting of a forum supposedly dedicated to political debate which by the way requires indifference. Hard to do when winning is the only concern.

Where were you when I was informing the NSG populace of the horrors the cult experience I went through?

I'm not sure. Probably out having a life rather than following your personal drama.


Know that I HATE brainwashing and after the experiences I have had I regard it as an unforgivable evil and will stand up against it whenever and wherever it arises.

The second part of your post is overtly biased proves my point. Accurate information has sources, and presenting information is not the same as attacking the poster in an attempt to either coerce them into a certain view or shame them for the responders pleasure. Presenting information =\= personal attacks. Debates are civil and indifferent, many I go to are ridiculously one-sided and kept that way by a mob of net zealots.

With me alone most of the responses I get involve twisting my words and sly attempts to shame and according to the Ross site coerce me into a certain view. Something which I know how to resist well due to similar experiences I had with fundies in the past. I have noticed similar behavior aimed towards others who have disagreed with certain posters who in turn were forced to flee from the manipulator's cyber wrath.

Let's see: in recent debates, I've seen you claim that:

athiests advertising their views was indoctrination
schools teaching tolerance was brainwashing
public schools regularly engage in brainwashing
California has made homeschooling illegal (which it hasn't)
California has attempted to mandate all bathrooms be multisex
human rights should take a backseat during any natural disaster, emergency, or threat to "public safety"


So where on earth would I get the notion that you peddle bullshit? And why, o why would anyone disagree with you and/or scorn your opinions?

don't forget TCT, men are like toasters.

I'm not sure. Probably out having a life rather than following your personal drama.




Let's see: in recent debates, I've seen you claim that:

athiests advertising their views was indoctrination
schools teaching tolerance was brainwashing
public schools regularly engage in brainwashing
California has made homeschooling illegal (which it hasn't)
California has attempted to mandate all bathrooms be multisex
human rights should take a backseat during any natural disaster, emergency, or threat to "public safety"


So where on earth would I get the notion that you peddle bullshit? And why, o why would anyone disagree with you and/or scorn your opinions?

1) What exactly were you implying by that "personal drama" remark?

2) the bs you have listed was due to any of the following situations:

one of my relatives on my account while I was gone (happens often being Filipino we tend to have large families and visit each other often)

my attempts for humor or satire

my point was misunderstood (possibly intentionally) and my words were twisted to mean something evil so that all of the NSGers can have somebody to masturbatorilly prod at. (this third scenario would prove my points in this thread)

or for some reason whether it be exhaustion, emotion or some other factor I posted something hasty without thinking. Every poster does this one at least once. Nobody's perfect.

It cannot be denied that NSG isn't exactly a model of ideological heterogenity. There are certain leanings (i.e. leftist, agnostic/atheist) that are attributable to a vast majority of NSG posters. The lack of rightist and/or theist representation on this board (I know there are some, but they are rare) creates a tendency in the posters here to ridicule undefended viewpoints instead of engage them in debate.

This observation is particularly noticeable in the reactions by many members here against some kind of conservative throng that does not exist. It seems like every religion/gay marriage/abortion thread contains at least one post with some variant on "grabs popcorn and watches." And yet either no opposition engages in serious debate, or there is one dissenter who is ignored or ridiculed. It is hardly the epic battle that many seem to expect.

Another common post references the impending wave of posters who fear "t3h ebil mozl3ms" or "t3h ebil brown peepulz" (for some reason always written like that). Of course, posters fearing muslims or brown peoples never show up.

Hmm, interesting little webpage. Let's put it to immediate use.


1) What exactly were you implying by that "personal drama" remark?


Denial – This is when the aggressor refuses to admit that they've done something harmful or hurtful when they clearly have. It's a way they lie (to themselves as well as to others) about their aggressive intentions. This "Who... Me?" tactic is a way of "playing innocent," and invites the victim to feel unjustified in confronting the aggressor about the inappropriateness of a behavior. It's also the way the aggressor gives him/herself permission to keep right on doing what they want to do. This denial is not the same kind of denial that a person who has just lost a loved one and can't quite bear to accept the pain and reality of the loss engages in. That type of denial really is mostly a "defense" against unbearable hurt and anxiety. Rather, this type of denial is not primarily a "defense" but a maneuver the aggressor uses to get others to back off, back down or maybe even feel guilty themselves for insinuating he's doing something wrong.



2) the bs you have listed was due to any of the following situations:

one of my relatives on my account while I was gone (happens often being Filipino we tend to have large families and visit each other often)

Lying – It's often hard to tell when a person is lying at the time he's doing it. Fortunately, there are times when the truth will out because circumstances don't bear out somebody's story. But there are also times when you don't know you've been deceived until it's too late. One way to minimize the chances that someone will put one over on you is to remember that because aggressive personalities of all types will generally stop at nothing to get what they want, you can expect them to lie and cheat. Another thing to remember is that manipulators – covert-aggressive personalities that they are – are prone to lie in subtle, covert ways. Courts are well aware of the many ways that people lie, as they require that court oaths charge that testifiers tell "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth." Manipulators often lie by withholding a significant amount of the truth from you or by distorting the truth. They are adept at being vague when you ask them direct questions. This is an especially slick way of lying' omission. Keep this in mind when dealing with a suspected wolf in sheep's clothing. Always seek and obtain specific, confirmable information.

my point was misunderstood (possibly intentionally) and my words were twisted to mean something evil so that all of the NSGers can have somebody to masturbatorilly prod at. (this third scenario would prove my points in this thread)

Playing the Victim Role – This tactic involves portraying oneself as an innocent victim of circumstances or someone else's behavior in order to gain sympathy, evoke compassion and thereby get something from another. One thing that covert-aggressive personalities count on is the fact that less calloused and less hostile personalities usually can't stand to see anyone suffering. Therefore, the tactic is simple. Convince your victim you're suffering in some way, and they'll try to relieve your distress.

NSG is a forum dedicated to unbiased, indifferent, scientific debate. Such tactics should have no place here.

sig'd for lols

flee from the manipulator's cyber wrath

Oh, and is this the best or the worst turn of phrase ever? I'll go with best today.

I urge SL to reply to my post instead of this one.

I guess him replying to both is now somehow out of the question?


To play the OP's "source" against the OP's actual posting is child's play. It's cheap sophism, cheap points won against a weak position.

Ssek, you're sterling NSG material. You like to win.


Right, so I don't deserve a response, but you do. Because my post is cheap and illogical (somehow), and yours is apparently genius on a level never before or never again to be equalled, more deserving of any attention...

but *I* am the one who just wants "to win.

Or, maybe you're being a tad bit hypocritical here, SL can reply to whatever he wants to, and everyone likes to win.

Here's what I've learned about manipulative people.

They aren't the people who have the frown or snarl on their face. They're the people with the smile on their face and the dagger behind their backs.
I think both are a sort of manipulation, really. A frown is just as passive-aggressive as a cheerful lie.

Here's how I think of it:

Those who want to manipulate make you look at a feeling.
Those who want to help make you look at a thought.

I guess him replying to both is now somehow out of the question?

Right, so I don't deserve a response, but you do. Because my post is cheap and illogical (somehow), and yours is apparently genius on a level never before or never again to be equalled, more deserving of any attention...

but *I* am the one who just wants "to win.

Or, maybe you're being a tad bit hypocritical here, SL can reply to whatever he wants to, and everyone likes to win.

SL can reply to me if he saw my posts. All my previous posts are gone now, other than those that were explicity replied to.

Killing this kitten is your work now.

http://www.rickross.com/reference/brainwashing/brainwashing11.html

http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/Assets/rebelleader.jpg
This site here should be a very useful tool for all underdogs here in the struggle against the massive circle jerk. If every poster can spot manipulative behaviors then eventually the manipulative flame warriors will be given no other alternative than to cease and desist this underhanded behavior and succumb to the ways of true debate. I have witnessed as many netizens fell to these curs, with this handy information good model netizens can fight back.

I got a "massive circle jerk" to report.

haha nice try. :rolleyes:

A case of minimization.

No, just point out that you are on to their childish game and that it will not work. They'll stop after a while. The purpose of this thread was to present information and how it applies to posters on NSG.

A case of shaming while projecting the blame

I argued that there are manipulative posters who employ certain tactics which coerce posters into a certain way of thinking and subtly abusing posters. I also argue that such behavior is intolerable.

And secondly I'm not forcing other posters to do anything. They have used those tactics in the past, are still using them so on their own accord, I don't see how I'm being manipulator since the manipulative posters have exhibited this behavior for quite a while with or without me doing anything.

A clear case of rationalization

Where were you when I was informing the NSG populace of the horrors the cult experience I went through? Know that I HATE brainwashing and after the experiences I have had I regard it as an unforgivable evil and will stand up against it whenever and wherever it arises.

The second part of your post is overtly biased proves my point. Accurate information has sources, and presenting information is not the same as attacking the poster in an attempt to either coerce them into a certain view or shame them for the responders pleasure. Presenting information =\= personal attacks. Debates are civil and indifferent, many I go to are ridiculously one-sided and kept that way by a mob of net zealots.

With me alone most of the responses I get involve twisting my words and sly attempts to shame and according to the Ross site coerce me into a certain view. Something which I know how to resist well due to similar experiences I had with fundies in the past. I have noticed similar behavior aimed towards others who have disagreed with certain posters who in turn were forced to flee from the manipulator's cyber wrath.

A case of playing the victim role.

Note that I am not trying to deny how words written in this forum can be twisted beyond believe, but snapping labels onto other people's argument will just become another verbal tactic if employed.

Personal experience: I have tried to hold an agnostic view on an intelligent design post by pointing out the impossibility in using science to proof or disprove the existence of God. You can probably guess what happens after that.

Very interesting article I have to say, especially since this form of aggression is what I do my research on*. Covert aggression as they describe it appears to be the proactive side of indirect or social aggression, which is what the actual behaviours are termed. The use of social behaviours to attack, exclude or emotional manipulate people is very common form of aggression and generally what we graduate to as we get older and more socially skilled, since it's easier to deny and has less repercussions than overt forms of behaviour.

I'd say the issues isn't so much recognising when people are using this form of aggression so much as people being aware that it IS aggression to use these behaviours. This doesn't mean you shouldn't disagree with people, obviously, but using behaviours which either socially exclude others, insult them (even in the guise of humour) or emotionally manipulate them are just another form of the many varied types of aggression we can use.

* Yes, I'm currently analysing the results of my online study and should hopefully be able to post them at some point this month.

I made a Libertarian into a fascist, no way am I rescinding that kind of power :D