Thread Disappearing?

[ceeboo]

In other words, suppose I were to reflect the rhetoric of conservative Christians back onto conservative Christians? Rhetoric or humor that I was inundated with the first couple years I lived at my present residence in person, in emails, or through texts? Being called a communist or socialist constantly by people who have never taken a class in economics (and by 'people' I also mean the authors of circulated email content not just my right-wing friend), "libetard" (constantly by my friend), endless fabrications about the next stupid thing California liberals are doing, conspiracy theories about Hollywood liberals eating children by the Q-Trump guy, all kinds of crude sexual humor poking fun at gays or old material that never dies, like the email forwarded to me during the pandemic with a picture of Bill Clinton and Monica and others with photoshopped masks but Monica's has a hole in it.

Yeah, perhaps one of the biggest and legitimate negatives about Christianity is the poor behavior of some Christians. No doubt about it. Sorry that you had some of these unpleasant experiences.

Sharing some of your real life experiences with me provides me a bit of understanding about Gadianton - Gadianton meaning the guy that posts on a message board under a specific username - Rather than actual human being that I have never even met.

And perhaps more importantly, what impact do you think it might have on an individual person who happens to be a Christian - or an individual person who happens to be a conservative - or an individual person who happens to be an ex-Mormon Trump supporter, about their choice to post here and/or their interest in joining this community?

There is a fundamental tension between the two ways you are painting the world.

I wasn't painting the world. I was asking you to suppose things about this message board. But, if there were anyone who was actually painting the world in a certain way, you would probably be able to easily recognize it by the attempts to cram entire groups of very complex individual human beings into a very small and single box.

[Gadianton]

While it's a nice gesture, no need for you to apologize for other people. I've been pushed to say a few things I wish I hadn't, and while there needs to be a line in the sand on certain things, like the constant email spam, I've had to re-vow multiple times not to get triggered during conversations. I don't have a hair trigger, as I put up with his insanity for months before I snapped the first time, but I can do better. And I would like to believe that at this point, after about 4 failures, I've mastered the ability to let him finish, carefully change the subject, or excuse myself for work or something without throwing insults back.

Disrespectful people can also be an opportunity for us to improve ourselves. And the person who is able to negotiate interactions with difficult people generally wins in terms of public or community perception. Unfortunately, it doesn't always work out like it does on TV, where the reward is changing another person or changing the behavior of a group.

I'm just pointing out that for any new contributor here, conservatives included, a person can take it as a challenge not to insult or repay insults. A new member doesn't have to insist that they be welcomed with love bombs or even treated equally to other members. They could view themselves as the underdog, and see it as a challenge to let their voice be heard despite opposition. While I've settled on this board, back in the day, I sought out only boards where I wasn't welcome with the intent to be confrontational, and I was never banned from anywhere.

The other thing is that as a free-speech board, the emphasis is on what people are allowed to say, not on community building. And so asking how we could attract more Mormons, conservatives, or more of anybody of any class, is kind of at odds with the priority of free speech. even if 9 out of 10 liberals were excessively nice to conservatives and super respectful, if a single liberal was constantly insulting, that could drive a lot of people away. But the mods aren't going to look at it as an optimization problem where one extreme liberal is silenced in order to attract 10 conservatives, it's going to prioritize the right of the extreme poster's free speech.

It's possible for the board to flip. If enough conservatives who are confrontational, but focused on the long game rather than tone trolling, were to set up camp here, they could ultimately outnumber the liberals.

[ceeboo]

While it's a nice gesture, no need for you to apologize for other people.

I didn't feel the need to apologize, I wanted to apologize, so I did.

Disrespectful people can also be an opportunity for us to improve ourselves. And the person who is able to negotiate interactions with difficult people generally wins in terms of public or community perception.

Winning public or community perception isn't a personal desire of mine, so I have hard time relating to this line of thought.

Unfortunately, it doesn't always work out like it does on TV, where the reward is changing another person or changing the behavior of a group.

From my view, not only is it extremely hard to change another person (it's even harder to change the behavior of an entire group of people) the amount of time and energy that is required to even make an attempt at changing someone else is very costly. To be clear, this cost is a personal price that will be paid, and it will be paid no matter if we succeed in actually changing someone else or not.

In addition to paying a personal cost, if we expend the energy, focus, and attention that is required to attempt such a thing (changing someone else or changing an entire group of people) we are left with much less energy, focus, and attention to place on and/or invest in ourselves. You see, the only person that any of us really has the power to change, in a deep and meaningful way, is ourselves.

A new member doesn't have to insist that they be welcomed with love bombs or even treated equally to other members.

The new member isn't the point. We, the community of posters that make up the current community, ought to decide how we treat and/or welcome a potential new member to this community. You need not agree with me but because I consider myself a part of this community, I will express my opinion that we ought to treat a new member warmly and we ought to be very welcoming every time.

They could view themselves as the underdog, and see it as a challenge to let their voice be heard despite opposition.

All I will say to this is the following: There are many reasons that human beings partake in discussion boards. Among this list of reasons, playing a game where they are joining a team with favorites and underdogs and winning teams and losing teams isn't in the top 100 reasons.

While I've settled on this board, back in the day, I sought out only boards where I wasn't welcome with the intent to be confrontational

What was your goal for being intentionally confrontational? Were you trying to change other people? Did it work?

The other thing is that as a free-speech board

The # 1 reason I choose to participate here.

the emphasis is on what people are allowed to say, not on community building.

I think both are very worthy things and I also think that it's possible to have them coexist.

And so asking how we could attract more Mormons, conservatives, or more of anybody of any class, is kind of at odds with the priority of free speech.

I don't know who is asking this? I am not asking how we could attract more of anything although I think more people would be a plus for the board. More people brings forth the potential for more thoughts/perspectives/ideas to enter the atmosphere and that, in my opinion, is a valuable thing for all of us.

It's possible for the board to flip. If enough conservatives who are confrontational, but focused on the long game rather than tone trolling, were to set up camp here, they could ultimately outnumber the liberals.

you are suggesting a strategy to "win the game?"

Not interested.

[canpakes]

All I will say to this is the following: There are many reasons that human beings partake in discussion boards. Among this list of reasons, playing a game where they are joining a team with favorites and underdogs and winning teams and losing teams isn't in the top 100 reasons.
…
you are suggesting a strategy to "win the game?"

Not interested.

This has literally been Mike’s claimed focus and concern since beginning his campaign almost two years ago … the supposed noble effort to ‘even out’ the number of alleged PROGRESSIVES!!1! on this board with an equal or greater number of alleged conservative voices … even the post that this thread refers to promoted that campaign.

And even as Binger wages his own campaign of board revenge from having picked a fight two years ago with another poster and then losing, he gives the same game away in one of his most recent comments:

You are not winning, Gad.

[ceeboo]

All I will say to this is the following: There are many reasons that human beings partake in discussion boards. Among this list of reasons, playing a game where they are joining a team with favorites and underdogs and winning teams and losing teams isn't in the top 100 reasons.
…
you are suggesting a strategy to "win the game?"

Not interested.

This has literally been Mike’s claimed focus and concern since beginning his campaign almost two years ago

I'm not Mike and I was replying to a post by Gad.

… the supposed noble effort to ‘even out’ the number of alleged PROGRESSIVES!!1! on this board with an equal or greater number of alleged conservative voices … even the post that this thread refers to promoted that campaign.

You probably shouldn't make a public post that references an OP post that nobody else can see/read except for you and a select few. Doing so brings forth clouds and clouds have a habit of masking light.

[canpakes]

This has literally been Mike’s claimed focus and concern since beginning his campaign almost two years ago

I'm not Mike and I was replying to a post by Gad.

Then both of our observations appear to be correct.

… the supposed noble effort to ‘even out’ the number of alleged PROGRESSIVES!!1! on this board with an equal or greater number of alleged conservative voices … even the post that this thread refers to promoted that campaign.

You probably shouldn't make a public post that references an OP post that nobody else can see/read except for you and a select few. Doing so brings forth clouds and clouds have a habit of masking light.

You can always strike that single reference, and use instead the other three- or four-dozen extant posts left behind by Mike and his sock accounts that refer to the same thing.

…

Anyhow, the part of my post that you didn’t quote does refer to posts that you can see, if you choose to do so.

viewtopic.php?p=2813904#p2813904

[Gadianton]

I will express my opinion that we ought to treat a new member warmly and we ought to be very welcoming every time.

And I will express my opinion that those primarily showing concern and welcome to obvious A-Mike sock puppets while ignoring legit new members says something about their motives.

What was your goal for being intentionally confrontational?

No defined goal.

Were you trying to change other people?

Never.

I think both are very worthy things and I also think that it's possible to have them coexist.

If you can't change Doc Cam, and free speech must allow Doc Cam, then Doc Cam's occasional vulgarity at conservatives must be tolerated by conservatives. If not, then those feeling castigated and wronged obviously aren't feeling much sense of community.

The only factor that participants have in their power that will allow both free speech and sense of community to exist for everyone is the ability to tolerate insults. Binger and A-Mike have sworn an oath to the god Bogadar that they will catalog every slight and repay every insult a hundred fold. And so it's unlikely they will ever be part of the hypothetical community you imagine.