NationStates Jolt Archive

Isn't this an admission of trolling. When he gets called out he says he is pretending to argue a viewpoint he doesn't believe because those that really believe it are too stupid to make the argument themselves.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11433509&postcount=504

Read the arguments he makes throughout the thread. He gives no indication of playing devil's advocate or simpy presenting an argument. He is vehemently arguing one side and then he suddenly claims to be from the other. It's absurd.

Seems more like a flamebait to me.

Conscience and Truth has been cornered in this thread as the troll I know he is. I don't know if it's warnable or bannable, and I know my "get stuffed" responses border on flames, if not actually being flames.

But this guy is clearly disingenuous about what he's doing and I'd like to know if any of it's technically wrong.

If I'm in the wrong anywhere in this linked thread, I apologize and will accept any censure you see fit to dispense.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=493403

If I can just add Conscience and Truth's first post in the same thread Jocabia linked to; I noticed it a few days ago when I was talking in that thread and remembered it as this guy has been complained about before, but on its own it didn't seem enough to be actionable. Perhaps in combination with everything else, it is:

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=11424192&postcount=3

Paragraph one: "I want to destroy all religion."
Paragraph two: "We have to learn to be more tolerant of other faiths."

Hmm. It's puzzling. He is an overly sentimental conservative American Christian and an atheist? At the same time? :confused:

Hmm. It's puzzling. He is an overly sentimental conservative American Christian and an atheist? At the same time? :confused:

If you'll permit me to heave in my tuppence here. It seems to be trolling, but a rather well designed way of doing it. He seems to believe what he says superficially, but when you read his posts repeatedly, you can see he's basically mocking the positions he takes by the way he posts - in turns uber-serious and mocking.

It's an unusual style, I'll admit.

C&T says alot of crazy stuff, most often bumper-sticker "leftist" slogans padded out to sound like real viewpoint.

Assuming that C&T "is" anything, many will undoubtedly assure you that the assertions "he(?)" expresses in no way represent thinking-person's Democratic Party ideas. Or, in fact, any thinking leftists' ideas.

C&T was called on this in some thread earlier, basically "his" assertion that "he" was a mainstream Democrat was laughed at by another leftist.

C&T really doesn't stand for anything well, and may not, in fact, stand for anything.

Polemics for its own sake may be C&T's purpose, as nothing C&T has said in the two months of posts I've read, really advances any argument, but merely makes bold assertions with no real back-up.

Irritating, to say the least.

If you'll permit me to heave in my tuppence here. It seems to be trolling, but a rather well designed way of doing it. He seems to believe what he says superficially, but when you read his posts repeatedly, you can see he's basically mocking the positions he takes by the way he posts - in turns uber-serious and mocking.

It's an unusual style, I'll admit.

Is he imitating Stephen Colbert?

Is he imitating Stephen Colbert?
If so, he's doing it poorly.

Righteous sig, btw (even though I know it "does not exist").

C&T says alot of crazy stuff, most often bumper-sticker "leftist" slogans padded out to sound like real viewpoint.

Assuming that C&T "is" anything, many will undoubtedly assure you that the assertions "he(?)" expresses in no way represent thinking-person's Democratic Party ideas. Or, in fact, any thinking leftists' ideas.

C&T was called on this in some thread earlier, basically "his" assertion that "he" was a mainstream Democrat was laughed at by another leftist.

C&T really doesn't stand for anything well, and may not, in fact, stand for anything.

Polemics for its own sake may be C&T's purpose, as nothing C&T has said in the two months of posts I've read, really advances any argument, but merely makes bold assertions with no real back-up.

Irritating, to say the least.
Thank you for putting into words what I couldn't -- at least not as clearly.

If so, he's doing it poorly.

Righteous sig, btw (even though I know it "does not exist").

Thanks :) I haven't found too many Discordians on this forum. Or Universalists. Or any other Discordian Universalists :)

Thanks :) I haven't found too many Discordians on this forum. Or Universalists. Or any other Discordian Universalists :)
What about J. Bob Dobbsians/Church of the Sub-Genius?

I'll never forget the Illuminati slogan:

Destroy your enemies. Betray your friends. Have some coffee.

What about J. Bob Dobbsians/Church of the Sub-Genius?

I'll never forget the Illuminati slogan:

Destroy your enemies. Betray your friends. Have some coffee.

Few people realize that coffee is the 32nd sign of the apocalypse. I haven't actually met any Dobbsians that I know of in these halls before. I'm sure some random RPers are doing a Discordian thing, but I want to hear a Discordian voice at the highest level!

I like this quote:

"Grasshopper always wrong in argument with chicken."