Spin off thread: satire versus insult

You're right, one is bad, and the other worse. I wouldn't use either expression.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I don't think anyone deserves that label.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

You may not think it, but you aren't me.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

To be sure. Care to explain why you feel that anyone deserves that label without using circular logic? Everyone here is a human being Oli; the son or daughter of a mother and father, a person who has spent a long time getting to the point where they can write here. I acknowledge that some may be somewhat off. This doesn't mean that they're deserving of the label you mention.

 

Yup:
obtuse - not to the point - usually deliberately so.
retard - slow of understanding and/ or development.
fucking - a fine old Anglo-Saxon word used for emphasis.

Everyone here may well be a human being, and they may have spent a long time getting to the point where they can write here.

But when someone has spent a long time "studying" unfounded fallacious specious nonsense and they come here to peddle it as incontrovertible fact, and continue to do so after their numerous and tedious errors and flaws have been shown to them what respect do they deserve?
A self-educated fool is far more of a fool than one who is such due to mere lack of education.

[Edit] Language is tool to be used: I've written official reports, technical manuals, popular science and technology articles and poetry.
In each case I used the language to get my point across with as much precision, concision and unambiguity as I thought fit for the purpose.
Those three words get across my general opinion of the recipient's intelligence, understanding, willingness to think and/ or learn and also display my disgust at the methods used and the duplicity involved. And it also provides a small measure of catharsis for me [Endedit]

 

Nice Oli. Niiiice!

 

i say!!

what what

 

If people are misinformed, I would hesitate to say that it's their fault. If someone thinks that they're right and they're not, I have never found it necessary to start swearing at them. I simply try to point out their flaws, perhaps add a

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

for good measure and I'm done with it.

I have found there are better ways to have catharsis then venting on people with base insults. Yes, language is a tool to be used; one can only hope that the people who use this tool do so wisely. I'm happy that you've written official reports and the like. This doesn't mean that you should treat some individuals as trash simply because you think they're misinformed.

 

I can't figure out if he's a stepford wife or a schoolmarm.

 

Stepford Wife or Schoolmarm would be an improvement, Lucy. At this point... it's like watching Jessica Simpson ponder why tuna isn't chicken, because it says Chicken of the Sea on the can...

 

Perhaps you missed the words "peddle it as incontrovertible fact, and continue to do so".
I consider the spread of stupidity to be a hideous thing and do my best to halt it, as opposed to just walking away...

Ah, the scott3x "I don't do it, so no one should" approach to life.
Perhaps instead we should take up the "stalk and report" method?
Maybe that's your catharsis.
Always an option.
Chacun a son gout...

"Base insults"? scott please, grow up!
The world is as it is, not as you YOU wish it to be.
Are you related to Draqon at all?

What a remarkable facility you seem to have for missing the point: I mentioned those things to illustrate that I can, and do, tailor my writing style to achieve what I want.
I consider very carefully what I write.

Again you seem have completely missed the point: I don't think they're misinformed - I'm talking about the people that have no grounding in reality whatsoever and STILL peddle their specious crap as if it were fact - the ones who ignore every aspect of science and stick to their delusions.

 

I have found that anyone who doesn't back up their assertions here to generally be taken lightly if not ignored after a time; I recommend you employ this method as I think it works best without causing unnecessary harm to people who are indeed misinformed. There is only one exception to this rule; if a subject is shut down by moderators. In that case, even a subject with lots of merit may not be seen. But that's life and it simply depends on the moderators of a given forum.

Stalk? I think reporting is good when someone is using base insults, yes. Not always effective, as the rules aren't always enforced, but it's a step in the right direction anyway.

Yes, base insults. Yes, the world is as it is. It gets better with the effort of individuals. I'm not related to draqon that I know of, but we do seem to share some views on how to speak with others; that is, politely.

I think when you go the base insult way that you have lost your way. How you can consider base insults to be careful consideration, I have no idea.

Why not just tell them they're misinformed and be done with it? If no one's paying attention to them, why should you care what they write?

 

Liebling at first I thought about this world of his where we sit politely like old victorian women at a tea party and it left me feeling thoroughly medieval:

"BURN HIM! BURN HIM ALIVE"

"DRIVE A STAKE IN HIM AND SCATTER HIS REMAINS TO THE OUTER REGIONS OF THE INTERNET"

Serously Scott in life you cannot expect everyone to be 'polite', I dare say I don't find your idea of civility even remotely desirable.

The first human who hurled an insult instead of a stone was the founder of civilization. ~Sigmund Freud

K is for "Kenghis Khan." He was a very nice person. History has no record of him. There is a moral in that, somewhere. ~Harlan Ellison, From A to Z in the Chocolate Alphabet

Barbarism is needed every four or five hundred years to bring the world back to life. Otherwise it would die of civilization. ~Edmond and Jules de Goncourt, Journal, 3 September 1855

 

And what about the, say, less knowledgeable who see the assertions and may take them to be factual?
"Oh it's okay, I've told the idiot he's wrong so now I can let him him carry on peddling his delusion. I know he's wrong, and I don't give a toss that someone could end up believing him."

Well I find "stalk" to be sufficiently descriptive for someone who reports on a single post from a specific user while ignoring every other reportable post in that thread.
Especially so as the "offensive word" in that post was not only not offensive it had been shown to be true...
Maybe I should have added the word "petty" or "infantile".

Base insults?
Tell me scott are you really older than 13?

Like correcting idiots and ensuring that others don't fall for their nonsense?

That wasn't quite what I meant, and I'd suggest you check up on Draq's expressed views on American women, to give one example, before you assign any "politeness" to him.

Because, for one, I don't consider it a "base insult" and for another it's the overall wording that's carefully considered.
And I would indeed imagine that you have no idea.

Maybe because I care for more than just myself?
And other people do pay them attention, which is the sad part.

 

My dear Lucy,

Were it not for the vacant clay-brained scantling, it would be a pleasure to share a spot of tea with you, perhaps even play a game of cards or two. The company is vacuous and tiresome with all it's meaningless chatter and efforts at classifying human nature itself so that it burn the boxes it doesn't like. Kind of a sad sod, to tell you the truth. Perhaps he should buy a box of his own and start building his utopia inside and stop upsetting all the other shelves, hmm? I do love a good row from time to time, but a battlefield played without well thought out purpose is a fight lost before it began.

I believe it was the dear Mark Twain who said, "He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would suffice.". In this case, it seems that the cord, the vertebrae and all the nerves have gone missing as well. A shame that.

Ah well, m'dear. We'll just have to tea party somewhere else then. I'll notify the Mad Hatter and he can pencil us in on the schedule.

~Liebs

 

Bells,

I will save you a seat!

"How doth the little crocodile
Improve his shining tail,
And pour the waters of the Nile
On every golden scale!
How cheerfully he seems to grin,
How neatly spreads his claws,
And welcomes little fishes in
With gently smiling jaws!"

~Fiona Fullterton

 

Ha ha, you said "word" - reported.

 

I... see. Listen, you can still get under people's skin even if you're polite. James recently told me I would be banned, apparently if I posted another deleted post somewhere. The post was innocuous enough, I felt and I wouldn't have done it if I thought he'd react this way. It's the second post in my thread "Clarifying when mods are entitled to delete posts ", here to be precise:
http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2218628&postcount=2

This is what I'm trying to get across. If people can find even innofensive posts like that worthy of deletion and even banning, then I think it's fair to say that more insulting stuff is far more provocative. And unnecessary, in my view. I think I can get across that I feel someone is wrong without having to resort to base insults and I think that with the proper training, so could others.

Ofcourse not; you can desire it, however, and make efforts to get there by having a few rules regulating how polite others are. This very forum does this; that's the 'no personal attacks' guideline, although it's not always enforced.

Why?

The founder, sure. Thrown stones are generally more harmful then insults. But surely we're not still at the founding of civilization?

Perhaps the moral is that good deeds are not always recognized. I think it's important to note that not all polite people are the same. Some polite people may simply decide not to associate with people who aren't. Others may decide to do so but protest it when others don't follow the same etiquette. The first class of people may find it hard to operate online, because as you probably know, a fair amount of people aren't all that polite there on many occasions.

Civilization certainly has had its drawbacks up until now; some have criticized Mel Gibsons' Apocalypto, but there was one thing that utterly astounded me; near the beginning of the movie, the Aztecs capture some natives from a rural location to be used as slaves. At first, they tie them all to a log and make them walk like that. As they approach the city, they get rid of the log and only tie them with a rope between their hands. Finally, they ready the men for sacrificial slaughter and they sell the women. One woman was too old to be worth much, so they set her 'free'. To die, I imagine; her whole tribe had been taken away from her and she was left in what's essentially the desert of a city. And I just started thinking how this idea of the city as a type of desert is increasingly true for many. The times when those who didn't have would simply go and find some free land is over.

So I don't mind your analogy. But while I think that there's definitely some truth in the idea that a romanistic form of society only works as long as you can keep on acquiring new lands, this doesn't mean that we have to treat each other badly. We simply have to recognize that the system we use isn't sustainable and if we don't change it, the 'barbarians' -will- be at the gates; the barbarians are simply the have nots. Low level criminals fit the bill to some extent I believe; I haven't actually seen the film yet, but from what I've heard of it Gomorra seems to fit into what I'm trying to convey.

Then, ofcourse, there are the high level criminals, such as the bankers. I personally like the video Money as Debt, which I personally saw online; I already knew a fair amount of what it said, but I still found it to be quite well represented and I did learn a few more things.

 

You ask why? Because its thought policing that's why. If you don't like what is being said you can ignore it or respond but to try and censor someone's speech is a sign of a controlling ponce, and that's what you are Scott a poncey ponce.