NationStates Jolt Archive

Is this thread trolling?

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=520790


Seems like a lot of [otherwise] reasonable people have major, major psychological issues about illegal immigrants. So what's your solution to this horrific problem?....The paranoia and xenophobia is alarming.


Psychological issues, paranoia...There is also the word "retarded" there. Seems like trolling and incivility to me.

In what way is mentioning psychological issues which I think are demonstrated in having certain specific viewpoints "trolling?" You think I just made the thread to get negative responses and don't care a bit about it? And if "retarded" as a reference to nazis is "uncivility," then perhaps "civility" is vastly overrated.

Anyway, I was a bit surprised you reported the thread, cuz I was just about to report this post (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12431753&postcount=129) you made which contains a thread-breaking large image.

More personal attacks by Greater Trostia:

Oh, no, you're not Hitler. You're just some little punk who enjoys being an offensive bigot from behind the safety of his mums computer.

However, the "solution" you offered WAS the nazi solution: execution and deportation. And you're right, that sort of thing might work. It's also so disgustingly immoral that if you truly advocate it, you're a sick racist. And if you don't, then you're just a troll. Which is it?

And this is either trolling or incitement to violence, I'm not sure about the rules here but I dont think this is cool:

Find them, execute a few arbitrarily to make a point, then deport the rest. As for where to, wherever I can bloody send them.

And I have read only a little part of the thread. There may be more such examples. I think mod attention is required.

In what way is mentioning psychological issues which I think are demonstrated in having certain specific viewpoints "trolling?"


Debate on issues, not on posters. Suggesting that your opponents have psychological issues should be unacceptable.


You think I just made the thread to get negative responses and don't care a bit about it? And if "retarded" as a reference to nazis is "uncivility," then perhaps "civility" is vastly overrated.


The problem with that:

i) People you are calling Nazis may not actually be Nazis.

ii)Calling people of certain ideologies retarded will justify its usage against other ideologies (ie: retarded liberals, conservatives, etc...)

iii)It doesnt achieve anything.

So I suggest you to behave yourself.


Anyway, I was a bit surprised you reported the thread, cuz I was just about to report this post (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12431753&postcount=129) you made which contains a thread-breaking large image.

If you can link me to the relevant policy about big pics, I'll delete that.

Debate on issues, not on posters. Suggesting that your opponents have psychological issues should be unacceptable.

In the post you are objecting to, I referred to no poster as a nazi. I simply referred to nazis who might have that viewpoint.

i) People you are calling Nazis may not actually be Nazis.

And I'm not a "leftist" but I get called that all the time. Oh well, but that isn't against the rules.

ii)Calling people of certain ideologies retarded will justify its usage against other ideologies (ie: retarded liberals, conservatives, etc...)

Yeah, or "barbaric Muslims." That's allowed on this site too.

iii)It doesnt achieve anything.

Unlike this thread, which you are hoping to achieve the silencing of my position through mod intervention.

So I suggest you to behave yourself.

I think I'll wait for a mod to tell me to "behave" if such is necessary. I have absolutely no respect for you.

In the post you are objecting to, I referred to no poster as a nazi. I simply referred to nazis who might have that viewpoint.


Yet you called many people Nazi afterwards, such as Blessed Chris, effectively calling all of them retarded.


And I'm not a "leftist" but I get called that all the time. Oh well, but that isn't against the rules.


That would be a problem if someone calls you leftist in post A and then calls all leftists retarded in post B. Besides, look up in a dictionary, Nazi is a derogatory comment to make, unlike leftist. They are apples and oranges.

Yet you called many people Nazi afterwards, such as Blessed Chris, effectively calling all of them retarded.


Saying someone has just offered a Nazi sollution is not the same as calling them a Nazi.

Besides, look up in a dictionary, Nazi is a derogatory comment

Interesting, a moment ago you just said it was an "ideology" and directly compared with "any other ideology," like "liberals" and "conservatives." But now they're apples and oranges? Make up your mind.

I am through arguing in this thread.

How about some examples -

flaming
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12429499&postcount=41
I think fascist bigots like you need to get the FUCK out of my country.

Flaming, trolling
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12429322&postcount=1
Seems like a lot of [otherwise] reasonable people have major, major psychological issues about illegal immigrants. So what's your solution to this horrific problem?

I have a problem with how awful people make "illegals" out to be. Sure the nazis might say it's "genocide against whites," but they're retarded and that's to be expected. It's surprising and dismaying to me to see immigration referred to as an "invasion" by affluent americans who have never been in a country that's being invaded. The paranoia and xenophobia is alarming.

Trolling.
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12429408&postcount=24
Heh! Yep, I have it on good authority from definitely-not-biased nationalists who oppose the free market, that outsourcing is not only killing our economy, it is virtually treason!

Flaming and (if you read the rest of the post) baiting -
Warmongering. Of course. You are despicable.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12431874&postcount=137
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12429520&postcount=47

Well, this one is appropriate to the post replied to, but part of a pattern-
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12431656&postcount=121

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12431775&postcount=131

Seems like the crux of your argument is if you disagree you're retarded, have major, major psychological issues, are a fascist bigot, a rasict, a nazi, a punk kid arguing from the safety of their mums basement, paranoid and xenophobic. Did I cover them all? You could try, you know, talking about the issue instead of the people you disagree with, but, then, you've heard that already.

Saying someone has just offered a Nazi sollution is not the same as calling them a Nazi.



Interesting, a moment ago you just said it was an "ideology" and directly compared with "any other ideology," like "liberals" and "conservatives." But now they're apples and oranges? Make up your mind.

I am through arguing in this thread.

To make a quick clarification of what I have said, I was comparing calling people of any ideology retarded in one example. In second, I was commenting on labelling people a certain idealogy, ie: making a stand alone comment such as Nazi or leftist, without any incivil adjective. So calling someone leftist is ok since it's not deragotory but calling someone retarded leftist is not, IMO (not sure about the rules here). That'll be also my last comment, I think Jocabia's post speaks for itself, Greater Trostia's behaviour seems to consistent.

How about some examples -

flaming
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12429499&postcount=41


"Fascist bigot" is a flame now?


Flaming, trolling
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12429322&postcount=1


Flaming who, exactly? People not on this forum, people who I gave a specific example of their behavior and showed that it was indeed paranoid? That's a flame? It's trolling to use anecdotes? Saying that "the nazis" are retarded is flaming? So what - should I say that the nazis were in fact very intelligent, reasonable folks? There are in fact, studies for the past 50 years that show racists have lower IQ.



Trolling.
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12429408&postcount=24

Oh come ON. That's a sarcastic comment that has nothing to do with trolling. You're just throwing out the term everywhere now.

Flaming and (if you read the rest of the post) baiting -

"You are despicable" is a flame? Interesting. But "let's invade Mexico" or "let's shoot illegals" is not a problem? I guess its that old internet double standard - it's okay to insult, slander, advocate the death of groups of people, but its not OK to possibly even offend one person's sensibilities with a not even vulgar opinion.

Seems like the crux of your argument is if you disagree you're retarded, have major, major psychological issues, are a fascist bigot, a rasict, a nazi, a punk kid arguing from the safety of their mums basement, paranoid and xenophobic. Did I cover them all?

Nonsense. That is not my argument at all. THat is my assessment of people who agreed with certain phrases exampled in the OP. People, I might add, who are not even on this forum nor named. And some of it is my assessment of people who say things like "shoot them" or "invade Mexico." That sounds fairly paranoid and xenophobic to me, what about you? I guess it sounds like a "flame." I guess to you, any negative conclusion is a "flame" or "troll," and so I guess in your view, no post from now on should ever come to a negative conclusion about anything. That might offend people.

You could try, you know, talking about the issue instead of the people you disagree with, but, then, you've heard that already.

You could try focusing on someone else. I know you have some sort of personal issue with me and pretty much follow me around, reporting any little thing I do in the hopes of getting the mods to get rid of me. I'm vulgar, I'm angry, and that bugs you. Well, that's your opinion, but don't say it - because "vulgar" is a flame and "angry" is trolling!

The problem is that you lump all people who are against illegal immigration with the ones such as who say "shoot em". Then you brand that whole group as people with psychological issues, etc...That's actually a very similar behaviour to people you seem to hate so much. Similarly they lump criminal, problematic illegal immigrants with all other illegal immigrants and want to shoot at that group.

Edit: Another Ex:

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12429520&postcount=47

In this post you lump everyone who complains as immigrant numbers as fascist bigots.

That's just an uncivil generalization. For ex, many people say metropolitan Toronto area receives too many immigrants because they wont be able to catch up to population growth with public services investments. I think anyone can see the problem about calling all these people fascist bigots.

It'd probably be best if you two quit fighting back and forth as you are going to convince the other one way or another. It'd be best just to cool down until a mod give her/his decision.

You could try focusing on someone else. I know you have some sort of personal issue with me and pretty much follow me around, reporting any little thing I do in the hopes of getting the mods to get rid of me. I'm vulgar, I'm angry, and that bugs you. Well, that's your opinion, but don't say it - because "vulgar" is a flame and "angry" is trolling!

You realize that every person who gets reported says this, yes? I didn't report you. You were bickering here with someone else and posted additional examples from that thread. I don't follow you. I follow the moderation forum and that's how I found you saying these things.

You said the same thing about the person who originally reported you. Hmmmm... everyone's out to get you, huh?

Meanwhile, I'm not at all bothered by vulgarity or anger. I'm bothered by abusiveness and I appreciate the rules of this forum because they keep abusiveness in check. Everyone's abusiveness, including my own. I assure that regardless of your opinion or whether I disagree or agree with you, I will always disagree with making abuse one's entire argument. If that makes you feel persecuted by me, well there's nothing I can really do about that.

Knock it off, the both of you.

Knock it off, the both of you.

Is this the final mod decision about all this?

Is this the final mod decision about all this?

It's a completely adequate response, but if you want additional input ...

"I concur with my colleague's statement. Knock it off, the both of you."