Online trolls are 'everyday sadists'

[mayhem13]

not all subjectivity leads us astray, some of it is valid but just hasn't been confirmed by objective standards.

 

.....then by what standards has validity been confirmed?.........

No sarcasm intended truthfully.......just looking for some insight to help me better understand your position and others of a subjective disposition.

[PopPop]

I think this is very wise. On the other hand, the threads I started that seemed to be the most annoying to others were all questions. Instead of coming to conclusions, some disputed the question, some said the question did not need asking, some said it did not need answering. The bottom line to that was those threads were unsuccessful at informing anyone.

 

Looking back, I can see what you mean. Every day that I read this forum I learn a little bit more about the people who post.

[esldude]

Or the most prolific thread starters ? Swamp the forum with your own threads, and "moderate" any dissenting replies.

Just check who starts the most threads , including polls .

 

I think the idea of letting thread starters moderate their own threads has merit. Maybe it could be tried for a couple months and then evaluated.

 

To prevent the problem of someone attempting to control the forum by starting large numbers of threads and moderating dissent you could combine another idea. You only get 5 moderated threads per month. Not a 5 thread limit. Just 5 you can moderate. Start as many unmoderated threads as you wish.

 

If that is something simple for the forum software to arrange (as it already does for blogs) maybe we could interest Chris in giving it a trial. Maybe a poll should be started to see how many are interested and for it.

 

Any comments?

 

And while I am at it. I wasn't trying to dominate this thread. Just saw how many replies in a row I posted. And I am sorry. I didn't think my little parody would be such a topic, and have been busy all day. So I answered a few comments I thought worth answering. I will lay low awhile I think.

[PopPop]

.....then by what standards has validity been confirmed?.........

No sarcasm intended truthfully.......just looking for some insight to help me better understand your position and others of a subjective disposition.

 

That's a good question and it deserves a good answer. I'm not convinced that everything needs to be validated, I'm comfortable with my ability to decide when it's important to start questioning my choices. Let me have a little time to think about your question, OK?

[souptin]

If that is something simple for the forum software to arrange (as it already does for blogs) maybe we could interest Chris in giving it a trial. Maybe a poll should be started to see how many are interested and for it.

 

Any comments?

 

If the blog feature has the modding control you want, why not just use the blog? Am I missing some important point?

[PopPop]

Or the most prolific thread starters ? Swamp the forum with your own threads, and "moderate" any dissenting replies.

Just check who starts the most threads , including polls .

 

I was thinking in terms of a perfect world, a bit too wishful maybe.

[sandyk]

If the blog feature has the modding control you want, why not just use the blog? Am I missing some important point?

 

It's much easier to ignore blogs by those you know have specific agendas, so that idea is unlikely to appeal to some.

I wonder how many of the silent readers even bother to check out blogs/monologues?

[wdw]

I didn't think my little parody would be such a topic, and have been busy all day. So I answered a few comments I thought worth answering. I will lay low awhile I think.

 

It wasn't "parody", it was snark...let's not deceive ourselves on this issue. The issue has always been manners and respect...nothing more. There is a gleeful disrespect that is wrapped up in the language of these posts that isn't funny or kind. Your tagline continues in the same vain.

I truly don't know why you do this.

I've asked before.

Why?

[esldude]

It's much easier to ignore blogs by those you know have specific agendas, so that idea is unlikely to appeal to some.

I wonder how many of the silent readers even bother to check out blogs/monologues?

 

Well, I agree with Alex, though not the sinister motivations he has in mind.

 

I think you see much less traffic on most blogs. So you get less interaction. I know I only look at them now and again. It is fun to find one very well done you hadn't noticed. But I don't have the habit of looking all that often.

[sandyk]

It's much easier to ignore blogs by those you know have specific agendas, so that idea is unlikely to appeal to some.

 

What is sinister about that ? I didn't say just agendas from the Objectivist side.

I admit for example, that if Archimago started a blog, (perhaps he has ?) that I would be highly unlikely to read it unless the contents were posted in a normal thread. The same would undoubtedly apply if I started a blog ,or a few of those who voted against the majority in the recent orchestrated poll, started blogs.

[Paul R]

LOL! Dennis - your only real issue is you do not believe other people have the brains God gave them. Do you honestly think that anyone with the brains and drive to succeed well enough to afford high end audio has not already figured out that their ears can trick them? Or that they need to rely on those same ears, or indeed, that there are somehucksters out there doing their best to separate them from their money?

 

Seriously?

 

Without at all demeaning the work you put in to garner your current conclusions, many other people have done the same thing. In fact, most people I know are constantly re-evaluating their positions, based on new experiences.

 

So you keep building up this "us vs them" picture in your head that does not really exist. Each time you are flustered you simply retreat and try a different way of saying the same thing.

 

I admire your sheer native stubbornness, but do take caution. One definition of insanity is constantly doing the same thing over and over- while expecting different results.

 

 

Again- merely my opinion- agree or disagree just as you like. And no reflection upon you as a person. Just if you want to be entertaining and seek to get your views across, you might want to find some new material... (Grin)

[esldude]

LOL! Dennis - your only real issue is you do not believe other people have the brains God gave them. Do you honestly think that anyone with the brains and drive to succeed well enough to afford high end audio has not already figured out that their ears can trick them? Or that they need to rely on those same ears, or indeed, that there are somehucksters out there doing their best to separate them from their money?

 

Seriously?

 

Without at all demeaning the work you put in to garner your current conclusions, many other people have done the same thing. In fact, most people I know are constantly re-evaluating their positions, based on new experiences.

 

So you keep building up this "us vs them" picture in your head that does not really exist. Each time you are flustered you simply retreat and try a different way of saying the same thing.

 

I admire your sheer native stubbornness, but do take caution. One definition of insanity is constantly doing the same thing over and over- while expecting different results.

 

 

Again- merely my opinion- agree or disagree just as you like. And no reflection upon you as a person. Just if you want to be entertaining and seek to get your views across, you might want to find some new material... (Grin)

 

Well Paul, how many times do I read, you need do nothing other than trust your ears? Hundreds if not thousands. Those people either haven't figured out their ears can trick them or don't want to know.

 

You are right about the insanity cliche. How one uses that to proceed will vary of course.

[PopPop]

Well Paul, how many times do I read, you need do nothing other than trust your ears? Hundreds if not thousands. Those people either haven't figured out their ears can trick them or don't want to know.

 

You are right about the insanity cliche. How one uses that to proceed will vary of course.

 

I think it may work both ways on occasion. Your ears may just trick you into believing what you set out to prove if you are predisposed to doubt some ones subjective observation.

[Musicophile]

And here we go again, objectivist vs subjectivists, the endless battle round, round 17.

 

I usually keep out of this kind of discussion, sometime watch some of it, but it feels a bit llike watching American Pie 3 or Police Academy 5, you already know what's coming next.

 

I admire people's passion about their respective viewpoints, but I have never seen anything coming out of any of those endless back and forths.

 

Chris, how about creating a special objectivist vs. subjectivist sub forum where this kind of discussion could be held, and then immediately redirect if any of these discussions shows up in a regular thread?

[Daudio]

The bottom line to that was those threads were unsuccessful at informing anyone.

 

But, they were very successful at drawing out a lot of venom from a number of posters, including you. I'm quite sure you had an idea of the reaction from the moment you composed the thread titles.

 

 

I think this is very wise. On the other hand, the threads I started that seemed to be the most annoying to others were all questions. Instead of coming to conclusions, some disputed the question, some said the question did not need asking, some said it did not need answering.

 

Oh, my, is this Saint Dennis ? The, I-was-just-minding-my business, the-dog-ate-my-homework, I-didn't-think-that would-happen, guy ? Maybe that is you, inside your head, but it is not the you that appears on the pages of the CA forums.

 

For example your recent 'parody', as you describe it, is actually a hyperbolic mockery, and for no good reason. Not as pretty as you try to whitewash it with a less then honest response.

 

You can fool some of the people some of the time...

[Daudio]

Chris, how about creating a special objectivist vs. subjectivist sub forum where this kind of discussion could be held...?

 

I think that is a great idea (lacking any other actions).

 

In fact, I proposed something similar a good while ago, so that probably puts the kiss of death on the idea

[Allan F]

I think it may work both ways on occasion. Your ears may just trick you into believing what you set out to prove if you are predisposed to doubt some ones subjective observation.

 

Or, to use the words that have been expressed by others numerous times, "Expectation bias works both ways." If you are convinced that something is not audible, e.g. differences in cables, you are not going to hear it regardless of the fact that it may exist.

[tne]

And here we go again, objectivist vs subjectivists, the endless battle round, round 17.

 

I usually keep out of this kind of discussion....

 

And this is one of the reasons that you are one of my most respected CA members. This and your exquisite musical tastes as expressed in the Album of the Evening thread. That thread remains my favourite one and the one I start with when I log in.

[Musicophile]

Chris, how about creating a special objectivist vs. subjectivist sub forum where this kind of discussion could be held...?

 

I think that is a great idea (lacking any other actions).

 

In fact, I proposed something similar a good while ago, so that probably puts the kiss of death on the idea

The eternal optimist, he?

[Musicophile]

And here we go again, objectivist vs subjectivists, the endless battle round, round 17.

 

I usually keep out of this kind of discussion....

 

And this is one of the reasons that you are one of my most respected CA members. This and your exquisite musical tastes as expressed in the Album of the Evening thread. That thread remains my favourite one and the one I start with when I log in.

Thanks for the kind words. Luckily I'm not alone in having passion for the music.

[crisnee]

LOL! Dennis - your only real issue is you do not believe other people have the brains God gave them. Do you honestly think that anyone with the brains and drive to succeed well enough to afford high end audio has not already figured out that their ears can trick them? Or that they need to rely on those same ears, or indeed, that there are somehucksters out there doing their best to separate them from their money?

 

Seriously?

 

Without at all demeaning the work you put in to garner your current conclusions, many other people have done the same thing. In fact, most people I know are constantly re-evaluating their positions, based on new experiences.

 

So you keep building up this "us vs them" picture in your head that does not really exist. Each time you are flustered you simply retreat and try a different way of saying the same thing.

 

I admire your sheer native stubbornness, but do take caution. One definition of insanity is constantly doing the same thing over and over- while expecting different results.

 

 

Again- merely my opinion- agree or disagree just as you like. And no reflection upon you as a person. Just if you want to be entertaining and seek to get your views across, you might want to find some new material... (Grin)

 

Was there any good reason to say any of this?

 

Chris

[Jud]

And here we go again, objectivist vs subjectivists, the endless battle round, round 17.

 

Chris, how about creating a special objectivist vs. subjectivist sub forum where this kind of discussion could be held, and then immediately redirect if any of these discussions shows up in a regular thread?

 

I think that is a great idea (lacking any other actions).

 

In fact, I proposed something similar a good while ago, so that probably puts the kiss of death on the idea

 

The eternal optimist, he?

 

If it was the same thread I'm thinking of, I believe I proposed that forum be named "Get A Room!"

 

And even if it wasn't the same thread, I still propose that name.

[Paul R]

Oh brother- lets not do that and we can say we did if you want. It would do nothing but encourage that segregation which is exactly what we don't need.

 

Paul

 

 

And here we go again, objectivist vs subjectivists, the endless battle round, round 17.

 

I usually keep out of this kind of discussion, sometime watch some of it, but it feels a bit llike watching American Pie 3 or Police Academy 5, you already know what's coming next.

 

I admire people's passion about their respective viewpoints, but I have never seen anything coming out of any of those endless back and forths.

 

Chris, how about creating a special objectivist vs. subjectivist sub forum where this kind of discussion could be held, and then immediately redirect if any of these discussions shows up in a regular thread?

[Paul R]

Was there any good reason to say any of this?

 

Chris

 

Yes.

[Paul R]

Well Paul, how many times do I read, you need do nothing other than trust your ears? Hundreds if not thousands. Those people either haven't figured out their ears can trick them or don't want to know.

 

Why do you suppose that may be so? Assume your assumption above is incorrect, just as a mental exercise.

 

You are right about the insanity cliche. How one uses that to proceed will vary of course.

 

So? Pick a new course here.