rigorousintuition.ca

How to undermine RI w/out breaking any rules? Simple.

1) Join, preferrably a team of 2 or 3 so as to be able to reinforce each other or create ersatz exchanges.

2) Post prolifically, preferrably by starting lots of new threads so General discussion constantly churns over.

3) Write gibberish, pretentious, self contradictory posts that are quite literally unintelligible.

4) Find the wedge issues in the community and then exploit them.

5) Harass key individuals who by their erudition and insight are natural leaders on the board so as to drive them out.

6) All the while cultivating a persona of being the good RI citizen innocently seeking the truth with fellow travelers.

7) When criticism arises take cover by pretending to be aggreived and appealing to people's compassion and natural tendency to protect an underdog. (Oh yah, you're an underdog)

You could follow this formula for years without any interference. It's net effect is to dumb down the conversation, drive away more thoughtful members and prevent more thoughtful members from joining or speaking.

How to tell the difference?

5) Harass key individuals who by their erudition and insight are natural leaders on the board so as to drive them out.

OH NOES, fearless natural leader, are you thinking of taking your marbles and going home?

That's called projection.

Nordic wrote:

5) Harass key individuals who by their erudition and insight are natural leaders on the board so as to drive them out.

OH NOES, fearless natural leader, are you thinking of taking your marbles and going home?

And as if on cue...

brainpanhandler wrote:How to undermine RI w/out breaking any rules? Simple. [...]
How to tell the difference?

You can't. Your list is an equally good description of what happens naturally on forums where interest over reaches insight and displaces an ability to learn.

But as you seem able to identify this presumably your response will be the same regardless of source, so does it really matter?

You could always analyse the latest trajectory of your suspectd agent, and use it to inform you of what's actually important today...

How to start a thread that has 100% probability of being locked .....


Ten, nine, eight, seven, six ........

brainpanhandler wrote:How to tell the difference?

Is this sentence incomplete? As I read your post, you mean how to tell the difference between purposefully malicious actions and plain old differently-saned/intelligenced ones(?) Though I could be wrong.

brainpanhandler wrote:5) Harass key individuals who by their erudition and insight are natural leaders on the board so as to drive them out.

And who might these individuals be? Do tell, I'm really shit at identifying people like that.

Nordic wrote:How to start a thread that has 100% probability of being locked .....


Ten, nine, eight, seven, six ........

That's the problem on most forums.

Sure a good way to keep members from raising valid concerns.

well this thread isn't constructive "meta", it's just a bratty little hissy fit.

tazmic wrote:

brainpanhandler wrote:How to undermine RI w/out breaking any rules? Simple. [...]
How to tell the difference?

You can't. Your list is an equally good description of what happens naturally on forums where interest over reaches insight and displaces an ability to learn.

But as you seem able to identify this presumably your response will be the same regardless of source, so does it really matter?

Naming names? No. Noting the MO and throwing it out there for others to consider who may not have already? yes.

Perelandra wrote:

brainpanhandler wrote:How to tell the difference?

Is this sentence incomplete? As I read your post, you mean how to tell the difference between purposefully malicious actions and plain old differently-saned/intelligenced ones(?) Though I could be wrong.

That is correct.

gnosticheresy_2 wrote:

brainpanhandler wrote:5) Harass key individuals who by their erudition and insight are natural leaders on the board so as to drive them out.

And who might these individuals be? Do tell, I'm really shit at identifying people like that.

I'm not naming names. I'm speaking in generalities.

Charlie Meadows sent me an e-mail along those lines when he got banned. He named names, though.

brainpanhandler wrote:How to undermine RI w/out breaking any rules? Simple.

1) Join, preferrably a team of 2 or 3 so as to be able to reinforce each other or create ersatz exchanges.

2) Post prolifically, preferrably by starting lots of new threads so General discussion constantly churns over.

3) Write gibberish, pretentious, self contradictory posts that are quite literally unintelligible.

4) Find the wedge issues in the community and then exploit them.

5) Harass key individuals who by their erudition and insight are natural leaders on the board so as to drive them out.

6) All the while cultivating a persona of being the good RI citizen innocently seeking the truth with fellow travelers.

7) When criticism arises take cover by pretending to be aggreived and appealing to people's compassion and natural tendency to protect an underdog. (Oh yah, you're an underdog)

You could follow this formula for years without any interference. It's net effect is to dumb down the conversation, drive away more thoughtful members and prevent more thoughtful members from joining or speaking.

How to tell the difference?

bpm, this type of metaconversation is very difficult to have productively. Ironically, I tried to have one a couple of months ago on the misogyny thread - and you suggested that I shouldn't - that it wasn't a good time. On reflection, I think that looking back, that was a very good piece of advice, certainly for that thread then.

The problem with a metaconversation like this is that our brains pattern-making nature will often run in to join the dots in ways that you might not have intended. For example, a person feeling a bit down on themselves (lots of people here know that experience) will be able to read you list and think "Ugh. That's me..." and reduce their voice - when that may not have been your attention.

At the risk of vanishing up my backside I wanna ask you a meta - metaconversation question.

What is your intended result for this thread?