NationStates Jolt Archive

I actually don't know. On one hand, I can see it as the flow of conversation-if the topic doesn't take and people end up discussing something else, is it the fault of the topic or a hijack?

Fassigen's first post in this thread is, I think, undoubtedly 'on topic', even if it's "I hate this topic," that's still about the topic. What ensues is, I think, a joint venture-the other posters chose to make their comments about Fassigen and not about the topic-so I could see the argument that if that's where people go, it's not really a hijack but rather just a shift in the topic.

HOWEVER, this is a pretty regular thing for Fassigen to turn a thread about something he doesn't like into a thread about him, sort of being his own lightening rod, and here we see that it is in fact something he not only enjoys, but tries for-
I have never been coy about deriving a sort of enjoyment at being giving attention - second considerations, even! - by people who claim that they don't want to give it to me, or that somehow I should be denied it. Few should be so familiar with that fact as you (so, do keep it coming, big boy). It is the succulent irony itself of it that I lavish, come it through the proxy of this paradoxically given attention as though it does.

Now, it wouldn't be a hijack if fish didn't take the bait-if everyone else had ignored him and stayed on topic the thread would have either died or been a discussion of the actual OP, so I don't know if there is anything here. The only reason I bring it up is that it seems that it's a kind of admission that his desire is to turn threads into 'Fass' threads and that it is a pattern. I'm not looking for punishment or action or anything, just a kind of clarification, more of a curiosity if anything else.

As I wrote:
Trolling would be if I sought it out with comments meant to provoke it. As it happens, I don't have to and never have. These oh, so faux-reticent people supply it willingly without any need for trickery or trolling on my part, so it comes all by itself at times. It's not my responsibility that they react as they do, nor do I have any intent of changing the way I post because of it or pretend that I don't find their reactions hilarious, because I do. Their reactions, though, are by their own intention, not mine.

I didn't "make the thread about Fass" at all - nor did I have the intent to when I disagreed with the OP that the video would be worthwhile and later asked that he explain in more depth why it would be. The people who tried to jump down my throat, however, did - and I did try to make them return to the topic at hand by repeatedly asking what my person or what other posts I have made elsewhere had to do with me disagreeing with the OP in that thread.

Yes, this sometimes happens to me (I think it happens to several other posters as well, some "liked" and others not so much - I have no illusions as to where these particular people choose to categorise me), but no, I do not seek for it to happen and even here tried to steer it into ending. Yes, I still do find it hilarious that it does happen, as I did state that I found the irony of the people who claim I should be ignored not ignoring me but repeatedly trying to bring my person into the threads quite exquisite. I hardly think that I can do anything else*, since I don't see why the occasional broo-ha-ha these people try to make should have the consequence that I change the way I post.

*Well, I can probably ignore them to a much higher degree, yes, but often times I succumb to trying to correct them or calling them on it (should that be "call them on it?" - damn, it's late over here), and I guess I could try harder not to. I would quite enjoy it if they made true of their claims and did so as well.

For the most part I agree with you, though I have more questions as to your 'innocence' in all of it. It really is a question I've had about hijacking in general and your post provided the powder I needed for it-that being if everyone follows, is it really a hijack or where the conversation goes. And who, really, is responsible for a hijack? Is it really something that can be moderated? I actually don't think it really can, and I don't know if I've ever seen it. It's more a curiosity than anything else. Though I do think you exert a great deal of effort in shifting focus to you when it's unwarranted, but that's just what it is.

Though I do think you exert a great deal of effort in shifting focus to you when it's unwarranted, but that's just what it is.

I assure you that it is effortless, sometimes exasperatingly so, in the sense that I do not mean nor wish for it to happen, but it does. Apart from better ignoring these people who flock (for instance that Johhny B Goode person who futilely keeps telling me to shut up despite knowing I wouldn't dream of heeding his admonishments) to that mean, gay Swedish guy it would seem they love to flock to for some reason (why can't it be Sarkhaan that flocks, why?!!), I don't see what I can do.

Well it did turn an otherwise utterly dull topic into a somewhat interesting read...

Well it did turn an otherwise utterly dull topic into a somewhat interesting read...

I disagree, sort of. I know that film and do find it very intriguing and had hoped that an actual discussion of it would evolve after people had actually seen it. We certainly didn't need another 'Fass' thread, he's more discussed than "Evolution vs. Creationism," he could stand alone as NSGs most over covered subject.

I don't think the thread had a huge shelf life, but the OP was certainly more interesting to me than where it went.

I disagree, sort of. I know that film and do find it very intriguing and had hoped that an actual discussion of it would evolve after people had actually seen it. We certainly didn't need another 'Fass' thread, he's more discussed than "Evolution vs. Creationism," he could stand alone as NSGs most over covered subject.

I don't think the thread had a huge shelf life, but the OP was certainly more interesting to me than where it went.
Had the OP been a little more contributive in elaborating the theme of the video, perhaps. It's usually a rather terrible idea to use such media in the hope of sparking a debate, given that most are hardly inclined to watch a video in order to participate in the discussion (let alone read the OP even in most cases.)

I assure you that it is effortless, sometimes exasperatingly so, in the sense that I do not mean nor wish for it to happen, but it does. Apart from better ignoring these people who flock (for instance that Johhny B Goode person who futilely keeps telling me to shut up despite knowing I wouldn't dream of heeding his admonishments) to that mean, gay Swedish guy it would seem they love to flock to for some reason (why can't it be Sarkhaan that flocks, why?!!), I don't see what I can do.

Well, you seem to think that everyone owes you respect when you have done much to lose the respect of others. Not only that, but you have proven time and again that your only purpose in life is to be an intolerable prick with no regard for others. And you have such an overinflated ego and a fantastic amount of arrogance that someone suggesting you're doing something wrong is an anathema to you. You spam threads just to see your posts and not to comment on the issue at hand. So, there is a reason I keep telling you to shut up, but for the reasons I have set out, you would never follow it. Quite frankly, if I grow up to be like you, I'll shoot myself.

Dudes, this is not in any way supposed to be a lightening rod for you to beef with Fassigen. This is not a 'pick a fight with Fass' thread. Turning a thread about him turning threads not about him about him to just being about him is a mind-swimming proposal, but seriously, no. No good will come of that and it's not the point.

Don't argue with him here.

Hey, did i miss something? I had real life away from Fass to attend to.

(why can't it be Sarkhaan that flocks, why?!!)
Because Sarkhaan has more honour than either of us, and frankly, better taste.

Dudes, this is not in any way supposed to be a lightening rod for you to beef with Fassigen. This is not a 'pick a fight with Fass' thread. Turning a thread about him turning threads not about him about him to just being about him is a mind-swimming proposal, but seriously, no. No good will come of that and it's not the point.

Don't argue with him here.

Yeah, sorry, Ctoan. Anger problem again.

We certainly didn't need another 'Fass' thread, he's more discussed than "Evolution vs. Creationism," he could stand alone as NSGs most over covered subject.
In all seriousness, i think i somewhat earnestly implied, from the GET-GO, that if Fass is an island, or at least atoll, unto himself, he certainly is more in the right to perform his own thread about his own problems, as i clearly invited him to.
Politely, at that.
If a person has experience (repeated at that) with someone like say, Fass, or Deep Kimchi, or FreedomAndGlory, or whatever, where they're known to express the same kind of antagonistic persona about the subject or whatever, and they already present material indicating a repeat in behaviour, would it not follow that whomever else has experience with that poster being that way regarding the nature of the OP bring that to bear, as response?
And surely, sans flaming and the oft-referred-to consequences for uncivil behaviour, the conversation will bandy about as such?

And you have such an overinflated ego and a fantastic amount of arrogance
You use those words as if they were bad things. :)

You use those words as if they were bad things. :)

In his case, they really, really are.

Hilarious. I suppose all the people flocking to this thread in MODERATION to flame Fass...are actually Fass' fault. Clearly he has hijacked yet another thread. To the pit with him.

Hilarious. I suppose all the people flocking to this thread in MODERATION to flame Fass...are actually Fass' fault. Clearly he has hijacked yet another thread. To the pit with him.

It does seem to prove the counter point. However, to further satanic advocacy, consider another player who would garner this kind of reaction, Eutrusca. The mere mention of him in a thread, even one in moderation, would generate many unsolicited attacks that were the primary responsibility of the people doing them (time and place) but shared that responsibility with the personality that fostered that kind of reaction. The difference is that while it was Eutrusca's way that fostered that, he didn't admit to taking delight or seeking that out.

I do think, and I've said this in the thread already, that it is inappropriate to just gripe or pick a fight with him here. It was the more specific case of essentially taking a dump in threads that otherwise don't concern him and then latching on like a bulldog to who ever takes the bait. Since someone has to take the bait, and people have to participate in order for it to work, I don't think it can be laid at Fass' lap except that he is the only real common epicenter. If the thread doesn't have value it can die on its own and doesn't need to be pre-emptively devolved into yet another FassFest.

People, people, MODERATION IS NOT GENERAL! Quit sniping. (Don't snipe in General, either.)

And, on the original subject, off topic is off topic, even if the whole world follows after.

'Nuff said.

EDIT: And, on re-reading, Johnny B Goode, 24-hour forum ban, flaming in Moderation forum.

The Brevious, please check your TGs (just a query).