Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Sunday August 21 2016, @12:19PM   Printer-friendly
from the oxford-comma-—-use-it! dept.

In a rather well-timed yet coincidental counterpoint to Why we're Losing the Internet to the Culture of Hate, Milo Yiannopoulos over at Breitbart brings us this:

A warped currency today governs popular culture. Instead of creativity, talent and boldness, those who succeed are often those who can best demonstrate outrage, grievance and victimhood.

Even conservatives are buying into it. Witness, in the days since Breitbart executive chairman Stephen K. Bannon was announced as Donald Trump's campaign manager, how establishment stooges have bought into the worst smear-tactics of the left. As with the left, nothing is evaluated on its quality, or whether it's factually accurate, thought-provoking or even amusing: only whether it can be deemed sexist, racist or homophobic.

Campuses are where the illness takes its most severe form. Students running for safe spaces at the slightest hint of a challenge to their coddled worldview. Faculties and administrations desperately trying to sabotage visits from conservative speakers (often me!) to avoid the inevitable complaints from tearful lefty students.

In this maelstrom of grievance, there is one group boldly swimming against the tide: trolls.

Trolling has become a byword for everything the left disagrees with, particularly if it's boisterous, mischievous and provocative. Even straightforward political disagreement, not intended to provoke, is sometimes described as "trolling" by leftists who can't tell the difference between someone who doesn't believe as they do and an "abuser" or "harasser."

Yeah, you knew I wouldn't let that kinda SJW nonsense slide without comment.


Original Submission

Related Stories

Why we are Losing the Internet to the Culture of Hate 146 comments

Paraphrasing an article by Time Magazine's Joel Stein:

The Internet's personality has changed -- once it was like a geek with lofty ideals about the free flow of information. Now the web is a sociopath with Asperger's. [ Submitter's note: the "Sociopath with Asperger's" comment is not my addition, but a verbatim phrase in the source article ]

The people who relish their online freedom to act under influence of the online disinhibition effect are called "trolls." Trolling is, overtly, a political fight; but it has become the main tool of the alt-right, an Internet-grown reactionary movement that works for men's rights and against immigration. They derisively call their adversaries "social justice warriors" and believe that liberal interest groups purposely exploit their weaknesses to gain pity, which allows them to control the leverage of political power.

When sites are overrun by trolls, they drown out the voices of women, ethic and religious minorities, gays -- anyone who might feel vulnerable. The alt-right argues that if you can't handle opprobrium, you should just turn off your computer. But that's arguing against self-expression, something antithetical to the original values of the Internet.

The article closes with a description of an exchange between Stein and a detractor. In meeting the detractor in real-life, he was surprised by her lack of bravado, to which she responds, "The Internet is the realm of the coward. These are people who are all sound and no fury."

Stein ruminates in response, "Maybe. But maybe, in the information age, sound is as destructive as fury."


Original Submission

UChicago Dean to Incoming Class: No "Safe Spaces" or "Trigger Warnings" 119 comments

Recent reporting and discussions here about "trolls" and the "culture of hate" (both con and pro) have repeatedly broached the topic of what appropriate limits to free expression might be.

Dean of Students John Ellison at the University of Chicago has taken a stand on the issue in a letter welcoming new students. He writes:

Once here you will discover that one of the University of Chicago's defining characteristics is our commitment to freedom of inquiry and expression. [...] Members of our community are encouraged to speak, write, listen, challenge, and learn, without fear of censorship. Civility and mutual respect are vital to all of us, and freedom of expression does not mean the freedom to harass or threaten others. You will find that we expect members of our community to be engaged in rigorous debate, discussion, and even disagreement. At times this may challenge you and even cause discomfort.

Our commitment to academic freedom means that we do not support so called 'trigger warnings,' we do not cancel invited speakers because their topics might prove controversial, and we do not condone the creation of intellectual 'safe spaces' where individuals can retreat from ideas and perspectives at odds with their own.

While some have voiced support for Ellison's commitment to free expression (with Robby Soave at Reason encouraging readers to give the dean "a round of applause"), others are concerned about the implications of his message. L.V. Anderson at Slate agrees with much of the letter's content promoting "civility and mutual respect," but finds the last paragraph quoted above to be "weird" and unsettling:

By deriding "safe spaces" and "trigger warnings" before students arrive on campus, the University of Chicago is inadvertently sending a message that certain students—the ones who have never been traumatized, and the ones who have historically felt welcome on college campuses (i.e., white men)—are more welcome than others, and that students who feel marginalized are unlikely to have their claims taken seriously. Adults who decry "the coddling of the American mind" will likely celebrate U. Chicago's preemptive strike against political correctness, but students who have experienced violence, LGBTQ students, and students of color likely will not.


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2, Flamebait) by aristarchus on Sunday August 21 2016, @12:24PM

    by aristarchus (2645) on Sunday August 21 2016, @12:24PM (#391002) Journal

    Yeah, you knew I wouldn't let that kinda SJW nonsense slide without comment.

    But, you did? How does bringing more of it contribute anything? Campuses do not want Milo because he is boring. Self-absorbed and boring. And, he says "SJW" a lot, which is a perfectly reasonable reason not to listen to someone. (Remember, not listening is not the same thing as censorship.)

    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Arik on Sunday August 21 2016, @12:38PM

      by Arik (4543) on Sunday August 21 2016, @12:38PM (#391005) Journal
      Anyone that is truly bored by him has a simple remedy - don't come. Do something else. Something, anything, you like.

      There's no excuse at all to go in, insist on your 3 seats, then sit there and pump your arms back and forth like logs going down a waterfall while spouting slogans and obscenities at the top of your voice to prevent him from speaking. Not only is there no excuse for that behaviour, but it is the occurrence of such behaviour itself which demonstrates, ex post facto, the need for Milo to have appeared.
      --
      If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
      • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @03:09PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @03:09PM (#391040)

        > There's no excuse at all to go in, insist on your 3 seats, then sit there and pump your arms back and
        > forth like logs going down a waterfall while spouting slogans and obscenities

        Never? Under no circumstances should a speaker be shouted down in protest?
        Are you really willing to commit to that? Think carefully.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @04:33PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @04:33PM (#391074)

          What possible circumstances can you envisage under which shouting down a speaker is the best available option? When is there ever a perfect opportunity for that one time to shout down a speaker, when that will make things affirmatively better? Even if you complaint is purely a noise or public nuisance issue, how is shouting the speaker down making it better?

          If you take it to prepared, invited speakers on university campus (the case under discussion here) how does tolerating manifest mass bigotry on the part of the audience making it better, as opposed to carefully documenting, analysing and critiquing the speech?

          • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:53PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:53PM (#391114)

            > What possible circumstances can you envisage under which shouting down a speaker is the best available option?

            Who said anything about "the best available option?" It is, however, a legitimate option.

            If you believe in absolute freedom of speech then you can not deny the right of someone to speak any time they want to, even if that means speaking at the same time as you and speaking louder than you.

            If you don't agree with those things, then you do not believe in absolute freedom of speech and that point we are just negotiating on where the line actually is.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:16PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:16PM (#391199)

              Yes yes yes, being opposed to censorship is just denying someone else their right to free speech (and advocate for censorship).

              Except one of these instances leads to increased speech while the other does not.

              What a facile argument.

              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:50PM

                by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:50PM (#391219)

                How is speaking louder than someone else censorship?

                • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @09:07PM

                  by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @09:07PM (#391236)

                  Nice change of focus. It's not shouting louder as if through a heated exchange, but shouting down to where another party can't hear what the other person is saying at all.

                  That is censorship.

                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @02:20AM

                    by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @02:20AM (#391407)

                    > Nice change of focus. It's not shouting louder as if through a heated exchange

                    So what?

                    Seriously, who says that speech is only speech if you pause so the other guy can get a word in edgewise?

                    If someone wants to speak uninterrupted go do it in private. But if you want to speak in public then either you accept some limitations on speech or you accept that some people will speak much, much louder than you.

                    You are suffering from the cognitive dissonance of trying to be a free speech absolutist but not going all the way.

                    Either you are all in or you are not.

        • (Score: 3, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday August 21 2016, @04:52PM

          No, never. Under no circumstances. If you have something to say, do it without infringing on anyone else's right to say their own piece.

          --
          My rights don't end where your fear begins.
          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:48PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:48PM (#391111)

            > No, never. Under no circumstances. If you have something to say, do it without infringing on anyone else's right to say their own piece.

            Got it.
            Buzzard supports the right of nazis, nambla and isis to spread their propaganda using student tuition fees without any interference from the people paying those fees.
            He welcomes rallies that advocate for the imprisonment, torture and killing of anyone that looks like him.

            • (Score: 3, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:58PM

              Yes, I absolutely do.

              --
              My rights don't end where your fear begins.
              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @06:01PM

                by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @06:01PM (#391121)

                How'd that work out for your ancestors?

                • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday August 21 2016, @11:18PM

                  What, you mean being able to speak their mind freely? Worked out fine until recently when the libtard fuckwads decided free speech was only for them.

                  --
                  My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @02:17AM

                    by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @02:17AM (#391404)

                    Look at buzzard pretending the trail of tears didn't happen.

                    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday August 22 2016, @02:24AM

                      My ancestors were warriors. They may have died but at least they didn't whine about it.

                      --
                      My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @04:08AM

                        by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @04:08AM (#391449)

                        > My ancestors were warriors. They may have died but at least they didn't whine about it.

                        True or not, its a non-sequitor.

                        They are dead because speech convinced the us government that killing them - men, women, children - for their land was perfectly OK.

                        Haven't you ever wondered why free speech is so important? What's the point?
                        So what if a bunch of people talk to each other or not. What difference does it make?

                      • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @04:50AM

                        by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @04:50AM (#391465)

                        Did you just say that the people who were force marched off their land and themselves chose to call that forced march "The Trail of Tears and Death" did not whine about it?
                        They didn't name it "The Happy Fun Trail" did they? I'm pretty sure those weren't tears of joy, they literally named it for the act of crying.

                        Just how deep is your denial buzzard?

                        • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday August 22 2016, @02:35PM

                          Walk a thousand miles, you're entitled to bitch that your feet hurt a time or two. What you're not entitled to do is bitch that an ancestor you never met and no living family member remembers had a hard time of it. That's called being an entitled, whiny, little bitch.

                          --
                          My rights don't end where your fear begins.
              • (Score: 1) by Ethanol-fueled on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:20PM

                by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:20PM (#391201) Homepage

                The way I like to present that point of view to liberals is to suggest that Trump will become president and then it will be they who will be marginalized and up against the wall; and that's why all people must stand for even speech they find repugnant.

                Suppose that Trump does win, and the present militant form of "political correctness," becomes as undesirable as racism and sexism are now - if those people had formerly stood for free speech, then there would be little or no backlash. One of the best windfalls of a Trump victory would be to see the swift backlash against the P.C. mass-insanity that's been plaguing America for the past 8-ish years.

              • (Score: 4, Insightful) by aristarchus on Sunday August 21 2016, @10:39PM

                by aristarchus (2645) on Sunday August 21 2016, @10:39PM (#391295) Journal

                Absolutely? "Only Sith and Buzzards deal in absolutes." Qui Gon Jinn, Jedi Master.

                The issue is not about free speech. It is about being an ass. And technically, being an ass means having no sensitivity to context.

                An instance: Once upon a time, a German University invited an American Philosophy professor to give a talk. Students occupied the lecture hall, blocked access, and the professor was not able to speak. Censorship? Maybe. But context means that details matter.

                The professor was Peter Singer, a well-known advocate of animal rights, and proponent of Utilitarianism. His talk was to be making an argument for euthanasia for those born with severe defects, with the idea it would be cruel to prolong a life that held no prospect for happiness, and only promised more pain. With provisos, philosophically this in an argument an ethicist could make. So why did the students shut him down?

                Germany. The policy of eugenics did not only mean the termination of Jews, Gypsies, Homosexuals and Communists, it practiced the killing of the mentally or physically deformed as well. There is a great scene in "Life is Beautiful", where a mother is complaining about a homework problem given to her child, calculating the cost of keeping a developmentally retarded person alive versus terminating them: "How they can expect a child to do math this complicated!" For Singer to attempt to give a talk on this topic, in post-Nazi Germany, bespeaks a complete lack of understanding of context. Political Correctness? Damn right, you do not give a speech like this in Germany, it is too soon, and many never not be.

                Of course Singer complained, accusing German students of not having sufficiently learned the value of free speech in academia. I was just wondering why he was such an ass.

                • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday August 21 2016, @11:20PM

                  Ar, you're your own contradiction. Without free speech, you couldn't say such foolish shit.

                  --
                  My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @11:43AM

                  by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @11:43AM (#391570)

                  So because a philosophical argument made some Germans uncomfortable, they took it on themselves to decide that nobody should be allowed to hear the argument?
                  Yeah, Germany is full of authoritarian assholes. Some things never change.

                  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by aristarchus on Tuesday August 23 2016, @08:32AM

                    by aristarchus (2645) on Tuesday August 23 2016, @08:32AM (#392035) Journal

                    So because a philosophical argument made some Germans uncomfortable,

                    Just don't get it, do we? No, not a matter of discomfort. A matter of moral responsibility. Germans are better at this than Americans, though at great cost. They are ashamed at having accepted such arguments in the past, and now will not stand to have anyone make the same argument again, having seen first hand where it goes. Context, ass. Or as realtors say, location, location, location. We see your location, ass.

                • (Score: 2) by wisnoskij on Tuesday August 23 2016, @12:42PM

                  by wisnoskij (5149) <reversethis-{moc ... ksonsiwnohtanoj}> on Tuesday August 23 2016, @12:42PM (#392083)

                  Germany, it is too soon, and many never not be.

                  So the feelings of a bunch of teens, who have never had anything bad happen to them, are more important than humans rights and correct medical care for the most vulnerable demographics?

                  I am sorry, but fuck you. This is the same thinking that the Nazi's used to dismiss this same societal group to unimportance. Feelings never trump Human Rights, I would not change that opinion even if the coddled teens were replaced with Holocaust survivors.

          • (Score: 4, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:58PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:58PM (#391119)

            No, never. Under no circumstances. If you have something to say, do it without infringing on anyone else's right to say their own piece.

            In other words: "I want people to obey only the social constraints that I think are important. As my bud Milo says, trolls should have free rein to disrupt, harass, and annoy to whatever degree they want, and we should encourage them! But don't let them shout my favorite speaker down! No! Milo needs a safe space to talk. And you should sit down, be a good boy, and listen quietly to his rant about how you should go out and disrupt social norms elsewhere!"

      • (Score: 5, Touché) by AthanasiusKircher on Sunday August 21 2016, @04:55PM

        by AthanasiusKircher (5291) on Sunday August 21 2016, @04:55PM (#391083) Journal

        There's no excuse at all to go in, insist on your 3 seats, then sit there and pump your arms back and forth like logs going down a waterfall while spouting slogans and obscenities at the top of your voice to prevent him from speaking. Not only is there no excuse for that behaviour, but it is the occurrence of such behaviour itself which demonstrates, ex post facto, the need for Milo to have appeared.

        I agree with you that such behavior is impolite and uncivil (and I personally would just avoid a talk I wasn't interested in rather that disrupting it).

        HOWEVER, I find it profoundly ironic for you to say "there is no excuse for that behavior" in a thread discussing the author's opinion that TROLLS will "save the world." If he truly believes that trolls are this tremendous force of good, why precisely is there "no excuse" for trolling one of his talks in person?? Shouldn't you be celebrating the audience member's choice to enact Mr. Yiannopoulos's lauded mode of discourse?

        Or is trolling only good when you agree with the opinion of the trolls?

        • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday August 21 2016, @04:57PM

          Trolling, typically done in an online medium, does not stop anyone else from speaking. There is your difference.

          --
          My rights don't end where your fear begins.
          • (Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:12PM

            by AthanasiusKircher (5291) on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:12PM (#391094) Journal

            Trolling, typically done in an online medium, does not stop anyone else from speaking. There is your difference.

            In the grandparent's scenario, did the protester run up on stage and gag Mr. Yiannopoulos? If not, then the protester is NOT "stopping anyone else from speaking." They are merely speaking in a distracting and disruptive way, just as online trolls tend to do.

            In an online comment thread, trolls can frequently drown out the voices of reason if they want to. I've seen plenty of online discussion forums overrun by trollish comments, where it becomes impossible to find the few legitimate reasoned comments. What's your difference again?

            (Again -- I am NOT advocating for people to behave in such a manner, whether on comment threads or at speeches.)

            • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:18PM

              They have typically made enough noise that nobody could hear him. See any of the numerous situations where their "rebuttal" was air horns.

              --
              My rights don't end where your fear begins.
              • (Score: 4, Insightful) by AthanasiusKircher on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:39PM

                by AthanasiusKircher (5291) on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:39PM (#391108) Journal

                They have typically made enough noise that nobody could hear him. See any of the numerous situations where their "rebuttal" was air horns.

                So?? Now you're trying to make a distinction based on degree, not on morality of action.

                The facts are thus: (1) Most people like to claim we live in a civilized society. (2) Civilized society has various rules and conventions for "polite" behavior in various contexts. (3) Reasoned discourse involves various conventions, which as you rightly point out, varies by the capabilities of the medium. (4) Trolls, pretty much by definition, are people who refuse to adhere to such conventions for reasoned discourse. They create disruptions and distractions that undermine the social conventions which allow reasoned discourse to proceed smoothly.

                Mr. Yiannopoulos here argues in favor of the trolls. His opinion piece makes no distinctions of "degree" for acceptable disruption, as you attempt to do here. If he did, I'd happily side with your distinction. But instead, Mr. Yiannopoulos explicitly encourages those on campus with "their thick skins and their contempt for social norms" to act.

                And they are. Just some of them are acting against him. Perhaps Mr. Yiannopoulos should take his own advice: "Trolls lose interest when their targets stop taking themselves so seriously." He clearly thinks of himself as deserving of a place of honor, a "safe space" for him to talk aloud for an extended period without interruption. He wants to be "special." Well, perhaps if he wants to avoid the trolls, he needs to give up this idea that he is so deserving of special treatment. He needs to stop taking himself "so seriously." That might involve giving up speaking gigs, though.

                OR, maybe he could adopt a more rational worldview in favor of reasoned discourse rather than anarchy and the sowing of discord. In which case, I'd gladly agree with you that the protesters are acting wrongly. For now, he's clearly getting precisely what he's asking for.

                • (Score: 3, Informative) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:58PM

                  Degree? I make the distinction on silencing of speech vs disagreeing. Period.

                  --
                  My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                • (Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @11:52PM

                  by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @11:52PM (#391343)

                  Let's translate: I don't like the politics you do and can't come up with a good reason why, so let's split hairs on the finest details of your position until you give up from frustration!

            • (Score: 2) by Arik on Monday August 22 2016, @12:21PM

              by Arik (4543) on Monday August 22 2016, @12:21PM (#391581) Journal
              No, this is your misunderstanding, however deeply you may cling to it. Trolling and DOS are two very different things.

              They do not troll him - frankly I think he would welcome it if they did! but they do not. Straight out DOS attacks, just screaming nonsense and blowing airhorns to make it impossible for the audience to hear him. That is not trolling anyone, that's just being a jerk.
              --
              If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by bradley13 on Sunday August 21 2016, @01:30PM

      by bradley13 (3053) on Sunday August 21 2016, @01:30PM (#391017) Homepage Journal

      "Campuses do not want Milo because he is boring."

      If he were boring, then no one would be interesting in his presentations, no one would protest, no one would come. That doesn't seem to be the case.

      He's a deliberate, in-your-face troll. He offends nearly everyone, which turns out to be very revealing. People who are so sensitive and insecure in their beliefs that they curl up and cry for safe spaces? Those are precisely the people who need people like Milo on their campus. The world is not a safe space. Just as an example, ISIS doesn't quietly go away, because someone feels triggered.

      --
      Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
      • (Score: 2) by quixote on Sunday August 21 2016, @04:51PM

        by quixote (4355) on Sunday August 21 2016, @04:51PM (#391078)

        There's a difference between a society most people want to live in and one run by ISIS/Daesh. Things like rule of law, respect for human rights.

        So saying behaving like an asshole is okay because ISIS is even worse sounds like the voice of someone who's so safe he's got no clue what life is like for people without that protection..

        • (Score: 3, Informative) by HiThere on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:33PM

          by HiThere (866) Subscriber Badge on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:33PM (#391103) Journal

          Think carefully here. If ISIS is running a society, you can be sure they will be in favor of you obeying their laws which they will write.

          Something being a law is not, in and of itself, a reason to obey it. It also needs to have an acceptable moral justification. (I don't find Sharia law morally acceptable.) If you prefer to say ethically rather than morally, that's ok. People seem to use those words in an inconsistent manner, and I feel that laws also need to be ethically acceptable before one should respect them.

          That said, laws are necessary for society to exist. They are supposed to outline the commonly accepted guides to behavior. When they lose respect, the society is in danger...and fear is not at all the same as respect. It is impossible to respect something that one does not understand, though it's quite possible to fear it, to love it, or both. But laws need to be respected, which means that laws need to be respectable. When laws are made unintelligible, they cannot be respected.

          FWIW, I consider this one of the reasons that our current society is in peril. Not the only one. But defense of unrespectable laws doesn't help things.

          --
          Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
          • (Score: 3, Funny) by Azuma Hazuki on Sunday August 21 2016, @09:03PM

            by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Sunday August 21 2016, @09:03PM (#391233) Journal

            Well-said! This is precisely why I'm Neutral Good: the whole POINT of the Law is to help those who cannot or will not figure out what is Good for themselves find it; if the Law is not working to this end, it is illegitimate and needs to be abolished.

            --
            I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
            • (Score: 1, Troll) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday August 21 2016, @11:33PM

              You're neutral good? Are you joking? As much as you want to push your views as the only acceptable views and demonize everyone else? That's lawful evil, baby.

              --
              My rights don't end where your fear begins.
              • (Score: 0, Flamebait) by Azuma Hazuki on Sunday August 21 2016, @11:57PM

                by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Sunday August 21 2016, @11:57PM (#391345) Journal

                Tell me, how many cases of halogen bulbs do you go through a month at that level of projection, Mr. Self-Admitted Staff Troll? Nothing you say is to be taken seriously anymore, by your own admission. Piss off and die.

                --
                I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
                • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday August 22 2016, @01:03AM

                  My views, sweetcheeks, necessitate that I specifically not force anyone else to live by them. Thanks for playing though. We have some luverly parting gifts for you.

                  --
                  My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                  • (Score: 3, Funny) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday August 22 2016, @02:25AM

                    by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Monday August 22 2016, @02:25AM (#391412) Journal

                    Horseshit. Your views start and end at "taxation is theft;" all else is window dressing. I've dealt with your kind before.

                    --
                    I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
                    • (Score: 1, Flamebait) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday August 22 2016, @02:29AM

                      Yours are "what you make belongs to those more needy", so you can fuck right off with that nonsense.

                      --
                      My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                      • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday August 22 2016, @04:35AM

                        by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Monday August 22 2016, @04:35AM (#391461) Journal

                        Number one, that's a gross oversimplification. Number two, you don't seem to realize how much you're revealing about yourself with your responses. Number three, why the hell do you keep talking to me if you hate my ideas so much? They obviously offend you and make you uncomfortable, so exercise your freedom of association and piss off.

                        I get it, I GET it: evil can't comprehend good. From the point of view of the rational (hah!) selfish organism, I look insane. That's fine. You can tell Rand about it in hell when you get there.

                        --
                        I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
                        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @11:55AM

                          by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @11:55AM (#391575)

                          Number three, why the hell do you keep talking to me if you hate my ideas so much?

                          I believe it's called "debate". It's how intelligent people exchange ideas, and try to educate and inform others.

                          They obviously offend you and make you uncomfortable, so exercise your freedom of association and piss off.

                          To me, El Buzzarino seems hostile and dismissive, but you're the one who seems offended and uncomfortable.

                          • (Score: 1, Troll) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday August 22 2016, @02:36PM

                            It helps to get my actual tone if you always assume I'm laughing at her.

                            --
                            My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                            • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday August 22 2016, @04:42PM

                              by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Monday August 22 2016, @04:42PM (#391713) Journal

                              Yes, it's only fitting that you die laughing like any other idiot...the clock's ticking, Uzzard. Statistically-speaking, you're not only over a decade older than me, but you sound like you have a lot of unhealthy habits, too. I'm done trying to save you from yourself; you made your choice a long time ago.

                              Keep talking. Every post reveals more and more of your own innate evil and will make those flames burn all the hotter when the time comes.

                              --
                              I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
                              • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday August 22 2016, @06:39PM

                                Funny, that's exactly why I keep you talking. That and it amuses me to watch you spin and bullshit your way through life in a manner worthy of a career politician.

                                --
                                My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                                • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday August 22 2016, @07:37PM

                                  by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Monday August 22 2016, @07:37PM (#391834) Journal

                                  You can't be saved. I just want to see, out of morbid curiosity, how low you're going to sink on a public forum. I know I shouldn't, but it's like a really nasty car accident.

                                  --
                                  I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
                                  • (Score: 1, Troll) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday August 22 2016, @08:07PM

                                    Oh I don't need saving. You mind your business and I'll mind mine is not a philosophy that's going to bring me an iota of bad karma. I'd worry about your own jackboot lurving self.

                                    Besides, I've said it before and I'll say it again. Everyone here already knows my views. It's yours that I'm looking to parade. Unfortunately you rarely cooperate, choosing to fling shit rather than debate an issue. Which I suppose says plenty about you as a person, so that's another win for me.

                                    --
                                    My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                                    • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday August 22 2016, @08:57PM

                                      by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Monday August 22 2016, @08:57PM (#391877) Journal

                                      You're not even on the same planet as the rest of us, good grief. Modded Troll because you admitted outright that's what you're doing. Christ, HOW did you ever get on staff here?!

                                      --
                                      I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
                                      • (Score: 1, Troll) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday August 22 2016, @10:45PM

                                        Not on the same planet as you? What a pleasant thought. Any chance you'll be taking up astronaut training?

                                        --
                                        My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                                        • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday August 23 2016, @04:04AM

                                          by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Tuesday August 23 2016, @04:04AM (#391988) Journal

                                          You seem to be running out of steam, dear Uzzard :) I told you, I can keep this up as long as you can. When all you have is trolling, Mr. Self-Admitted Staff Troll, you run out of material very, very quickly. And since I, unlike you, am not an ambulatory dumpster fire of a human being who doesn't remember the First Rule of Holes...well, do the math.

                                          Keep going; they say a flame burns brightest before it goes out.

                                          --
                                          I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
                                          • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday August 23 2016, @01:37PM

                                            by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Tuesday August 23 2016, @01:37PM (#392110) Homepage Journal

                                            You still think you're harming a someone who's trolling you by getting into a flamewar? What Internet have you been on for the past, oh, forever?

                                            --
                                            My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                                            • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday August 23 2016, @04:05PM

                                              by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Tuesday August 23 2016, @04:05PM (#392189) Journal

                                              I'm not harming you, Uzzard; YOU are. That's the entire point of this little exercise: so you'll have a nice long rap sheet for all and sundry to see, in this world and the next. You're too damn stupid to shut your mouth and cut your losses, and I'm morbidly curious as to how low you'll sink. This kind of self-reinforcing narcissism is fascinating to me.

                                              --
                                              I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
                                              • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday August 23 2016, @05:55PM

                                                by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Tuesday August 23 2016, @05:55PM (#392221) Homepage Journal

                                                You're wrestling with a pig in the mud and you think you're the one making out good. That's just funny.

                                                --
                                                My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                                                • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday August 23 2016, @06:37PM

                                                  by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Tuesday August 23 2016, @06:37PM (#392234) Journal

                                                  You really do not have a grasp of the situation here, do you Uzzard...? That's fine; keep flapping your inbred, retarded foodsucker. You're only making this worse for yourself in the long run.

                                                  --
                                                  I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
                                                  • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday August 23 2016, @11:12PM

                                                    by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Tuesday August 23 2016, @11:12PM (#392363) Homepage Journal

                                                    You seriously think shit talking me is doing anything? All it does is make you look like the rage-filled harpy that you are. Everyone already knows the specific kind of asshole that I am. I'm happy to do this until the story goes into archive mode.

                                                    --
                                                    My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                                                    • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday August 24 2016, @04:53AM

                                                      by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Wednesday August 24 2016, @04:53AM (#392462) Journal

                                                      What angle do I need to turn this at to get it through your head? It's not about what's happening here, Uzzard. I've never seen someone dig themselves this deep since that one insane court transcript everyone was ranting about.

                                                      --
                                                      I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
                                                      • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday August 24 2016, @12:31PM

                                                        by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Wednesday August 24 2016, @12:31PM (#392544) Homepage Journal

                                                        Sweety, everyone already knows exactly who I am. You're not showing them anything. There is no hole. You're only showing them your own ass.

                                                        --
                                                        My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                                                        • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday August 24 2016, @04:54PM

                                                          by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Wednesday August 24 2016, @04:54PM (#392659) Journal

                                                          No, most people have no idea what kind of walking memetic plague laboratory you are. The more you post and participate, though, the more people see it. I can keep this up as long as you can, and likely longer, mostly because there's not much effort involved on my part. And you're unintentionally revealing a bit of narcissism there, as if you think the entire forum knows or gives a shit about you, Mr. Staff Troll.

                                                          --
                                                          I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
                                                          • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday August 24 2016, @09:33PM

                                                            by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Wednesday August 24 2016, @09:33PM (#392772) Homepage Journal

                                                            You really believe that after being on staff here for over a year and commenting, loudly and without restraint, that people don't know exactly how I roll? Wal-Mart has clues on sale right by the registers; pick one up.

                                                            --
                                                            My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                                                            • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday August 25 2016, @03:56AM

                                                              by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Thursday August 25 2016, @03:56AM (#392866) Journal

                                                              Actually, yes, Uzzard. Because most people will see your posts and either dismiss you as someone who's constantly taking the piss, like Ethanol-Fueled, or take you for the kind of mouthbreathing moron who parrots shit without knowing what it means. I aim to dispel that illusion; you are not stupid, you are evil, which is an entirely different kettle of fish. Stupidity, or ignorance at least, is forgivable.

                                                              --
                                                              I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
                                                              • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday August 25 2016, @08:51AM

                                                                by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Thursday August 25 2016, @08:51AM (#392922) Homepage Journal

                                                                Well, now that's interesting. What exactly brought you to this conclusion?

                                                                --
                                                                My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                                                                • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday August 25 2016, @06:36PM

                                                                  by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Thursday August 25 2016, @06:36PM (#393123) Journal

                                                                  Long observation of human nature. Most people, as I keep saying, are not the kind of waddling virus lab you are, and your transparent motivation for assuming they are is so you don't have to examine and change your behavior ("well everyone is this bad, human nature sucks, so leave me alone!").

                                                                  When faced with something truly horrible, most decent humans simply cannot comprehend it, and refuse to, as if their brain has a conceptual filter. I run into this constantly with the anti-human-trafficking stuff; people simply can't believe such horrible things happen in this country in this day and age, and will do anything they can to disbelieve it, up to and including accusing myself and my friends of being scammers. There seems to be a deeply-rooted need to believe that the world is a fundamentally just place, so deep that people would rather blame the victim or ignore the problem entirely rather than be made uncomfortable or, heaven forbid, do something about it.

                                                                  You really are an awful person, and yes, that is in comparison to most of humanity. My direct sample may only be a few thousand people, but I also know my history. And, interestingly, your insistence on "don't force my views on anyone" may actually be your subconscious acknowledging this and trying to keep you at least partially cloistered away from most of humanity; it's like some part of you realizes you're miswired and is trying to minimize the damage you do to other people.

                                                                  --
                                                                  I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
                                                                  • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday August 26 2016, @01:03AM

                                                                    You're projecting again. My thought processes run not remotely like that.

                                                                    --
                                                                    My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                                                                    • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Friday August 26 2016, @05:05PM

                                                                      by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Friday August 26 2016, @05:05PM (#393569) Journal

                                                                      Nope, sorry, I've met enough people who think and act like you to know how they work. You don't even see it; it's mostly subconscious. I've got my flaws, but I sure as hell do not go around thinking everyone is the same as me inside. Heaven forbid.

                                                                      --
                                                                      I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
                                                                      • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday August 26 2016, @06:13PM

                                                                        You've never met me, chuckles. You only think you know about me what I want you to see.

                                                                        --
                                                                        My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                                                                        • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Friday August 26 2016, @06:24PM

                                                                          by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Friday August 26 2016, @06:24PM (#393614) Journal

                                                                          It's how you say what you want me to see, and more importantly what you DON'T say, that tells me what I need to know. Even your reactions, like this one, are giving a very good outline of yourself to those as can read these things.

                                                                          You Really Do Not Know The First Rule Of Holes (TM)

                                                                          --
                                                                          I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
                                                                          • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday August 26 2016, @09:17PM

                                                                            Darlin, everyone else here has read exactly the same things you have and you are alone in deciding I am Hilter as far as I can tell. I wonder why that is?

                                                                            --
                                                                            My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                                                                            • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Saturday August 27 2016, @03:59AM

                                                                              by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Saturday August 27 2016, @03:59AM (#393855) Journal

                                                                              Hitler? Good grief, looks like I actually underestimated your narcissism a bit...no, Uzzard, I don't think you're Hitler. I do think you're one of the people who could potentially turn "stochastic terrorist pawn" though.

                                                                              --
                                                                              I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
                                                                              • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday August 27 2016, @02:04PM

                                                                                by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Saturday August 27 2016, @02:04PM (#393928) Homepage Journal

                                                                                Oh, you mean I might take up arms against an oppressive government that tramples our rights daily? You'd be correct. If fighting oppression is your version of evil though, you need to do some serious introspection.

                                                                                --
                                                                                My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                                                                                • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday August 29 2016, @07:24AM

                                                                                  by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Monday August 29 2016, @07:24AM (#394516) Journal

                                                                                  ...see, Uzzard, you did it again. This is exactly what I mean about you doing my work for me. That was some weapons-grade motherfucking nutso right there.

                                                                                  --
                                                                                  I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
                          • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday August 22 2016, @04:49PM

                            by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Monday August 22 2016, @04:49PM (#391717) Journal

                            AC: I'm used to being offended, and I EXPECT it when strong minds clash. I don't fear offense, like it seems a hell of a lot of my peers to. Besides, given the amount of it I cause, it'd be rather hypocritical, no?

                            As to uncomfortable? You bet I am; it's actually physically painful to be around people with this mindset in meatspace. Here on the 'net it's just gross rather than outright painful. But you gotta do what you gotta do, right? No one said it would be easy.

                            Thankfully, he and everyone who works like him damn themselves far more thoroughly with their own hand than anything I could possibly say or do. They're so completely unaware of what complete ambulatory trash-fires they are that they just...keep...going.

                            --
                            I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
    • (Score: 2, Insightful) by linuxrocks123 on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:47PM

      by linuxrocks123 (2557) on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:47PM (#391216) Journal

      And, he says "SJW" a lot, which is a perfectly reasonable reason not to listen to someone.

      Actually, saying that is a perfectly reasonable reason not to listen to you. This plus your comments on the "Internet Culture of Hate" article, plus crap like this

      https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?sid=15006&threshold=0&commentsort=0&mode=nested&cid=388120 [soylentnews.org]

      plus having posted nothing interesting since the public cutoff for your posting history, all together add up to inclusion in my kill file*. Welcome.

      *Since I don't know exactly how ignorant you are, I'm not threatening to kill you, dumbass. Please Google "kill file" if you don't know what it means.

      • (Score: 2) by aristarchus on Sunday August 21 2016, @11:48PM

        by aristarchus (2645) on Sunday August 21 2016, @11:48PM (#391338) Journal

        Linuxrocks! WooHoo! But linuxrocks123? No, your reason is not reasonable! You are missing out on a fine opportunity to open your mind to other points of view, just like the AIQs want you to do! Please don't put me in your kill-file! I have no idea how I could deal with you not reading my posts! I will be bereft, inconsolable, plunged into a black abyss of being ignored by linuxrocks123! How you you do this to a fellow Soylentil?

        'sniff. . .

        • (Score: 2) by linuxrocks123 on Monday August 22 2016, @02:27AM

          by linuxrocks123 (2557) on Monday August 22 2016, @02:27AM (#391414) Journal

          You are missing out on a fine opportunity to open your mind to other points of view, just like the AIQs want you to do!

          That's sort of the point of telling you. I usually don't tell people, but you got added mostly because of your closed-mindedness, so the irony was too good to resist.

          And, he says "SJW" a lot, which is a perfectly reasonable reason not to listen to someone.

          See it now?

          Also, the kill file is actually just a -2 penalty, so I'll still see your posts until I up my threshold to 1 because the crap from ACs and killfiled blowhards gets too severe. If you post anything worthwhile before then, I'll probably take you off.

          • (Score: 2) by aristarchus on Monday August 22 2016, @05:30AM

            by aristarchus (2645) on Monday August 22 2016, @05:30AM (#391471) Journal

            Also, the kill file is actually just a -2 penalty, so I'll still see your posts until I up my threshold to 1 because the crap from ACs and killfiled blowhards gets too severe. If you post anything worthwhile before then, I'll probably take you off.

            Oh Merciful linuxrocks123, please have mercy upon my posts that disagree with you! As previously stated, I do not know how I could possibly live with the possibility that you were not reading my posts. But now I see that you still will? Oh, thank Ganesh! And Sedna! And you might take me off of your list? The list that only affects what you see?

              Oh, please, oh great and merciful linuxrocks123, he who holds the list of kill in his very hands, if you could forgive my transgressions, and allow me once again to grace your view of SoylentNews, that would, well, actually, it would not make any difference to me at all! In fact, I may just put you on my kill list! And I might browse at +1! So there, you insignificant worm! Grovel before me, or I will insult you a seconde Tyme. (He's already got a Grail, it's verry nice! )

            Oh, that large growth of your ego, I would get that looked after. Else apply to Brietburt News, seems they could use a fresh supply of wackos.

  • (Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @12:35PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @12:35PM (#391003)

    Trolling has become a byword for everything the left disagrees with, particularly if it's boisterous, mischievous and provocative. Even straightforward political disagreement, not intended to provoke, is sometimes described as "trolling" by leftists who can't tell the difference between someone who doesn't believe as they do and an "abuser" or "harasser."

    This started on Daily Kos. I was there. The admins decided to misuse "troll" as an excuse to get rid of anyone who argued against the Party Line. Oppose illegal immigration? Troll! Banned! Oppose killing the Jews, all of them? Troll! Banned! The same cancer is infecting Wikipedia now.

    DCLeaks and minimal further research shows that the Center for American Progress is literally run by former Soviet agents recruited by Morton Halperin who literally support al-Qaeda and have been deliberately sabotaging US intelligence with bad information with the stated intent of eliminating all criticism of Islam. And the same exact people run Hillary Clinton's campaign. Right-wing extremists seem to have been spot on for a lot of things.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @03:18PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @03:18PM (#391043)

      Oppose illegal immigration? Troll!

      It's funny, but the opposite is true on IT sites like /., and to a lesser extent SN. Go check out some past threads.

      On /., I suspect that some mods make it a point to look over the thread after it's been up for awhile to make sure that most or all the featured posts (expanded) would be anti-H1B and anti-new immigrants in general.

      • (Score: 2) by meustrus on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:20PM

        by meustrus (4961) on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:20PM (#391202)

        It bears mentioning that H1B and illegal immigration are really two completely separate issues. Only one of them directly impacts the "nerds" demographic that these sites cater to. Only one of them is actually illegal. And racism against Indians is not the same thing as racism against Hispanics.

        --
        If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
    • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @06:02PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @06:02PM (#391122)

      There's an amazing amount of projection in the people who use terms like that too, and what's even more amazing is that they don't see it.

      Take the alt-left types who use "troll." That word is very, very revealing about the psychology of the user. It's taken from Swedish (mimicry is the best form of flattery), someone who is grotesque and lives in the dark. Usually under a bridge. I mean why so concerned about appearances? Haven't we had enough of unrealistic Western beauty standards? Not to mention the not so subtle implication that only left is enlightened, like a shining star bringing truth to the intellectual underclass that is forced to live under bridges. Yeah, well, that's sweet and all, but setting the bridge on fire isn't the most productive way of illuminating the area. Some spare change was all that was being asked for.

      But to the people who actually think calling someone "troll" means anything in political context, what it reveals about the user is a set of 18th century ideas about everything from personal liberty to a post-post-post-post-post-post-modern noblesse oblige to a belief in ESP and mind-reading to their ideas about power and government (and who can be entrusted to the reigns of power). I can guarantee you its users are the classic "Authoritarian" stereotype, are likely to be disillusioned Hillary voters or worse, are probably superficially pro-gay rights (except for when homosexuals decide to have opinions of their own), are likely to see poor uneducated whites as stooges of the Republicans but poor uneducated blacks as having advanced political science degrees by virtue of being poor uneducated blacks, and so forth.

      They're also projecting like mad. They see *themselves* as having been trolled by the DNC, with all the wounding to their "Feel the Bern" that implies, and are lashing out, thinking that by accusing someone *else* of being a troll, it will somehow magically wipe away their shame.

      • (Score: 2, Informative) by meustrus on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:29PM

        by meustrus (4961) on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:29PM (#391205)

        Well actually (I'll be that guy this time) the word "troll" comes from fishing. Trolling is a fishing term that was adopted by people who were trying to start a flamewar by "trolling" for ideologues, getting one of them to say something that the other side would find highly offensive. It has been through a lot of transformations since then, with the latest one unfortunately turning it from "jerk that likes to stir up trouble" to "jerk I disagree with".

        As for everything else you have to say about the word "troll"...well it's possible you've been around the internet a lot than I have, but I think it's more likely that you're projecting an excessively specific stereotype of everything you dislike onto every single person that you disagree with.

        --
        If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
        • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:44PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:44PM (#391214)
          • (Score: 2) by meustrus on Tuesday August 23 2016, @03:53PM

            by meustrus (4961) on Tuesday August 23 2016, @03:53PM (#392183)

            Thanks for that. I didn't really read through the other one because I only wanted to make a point about the two of them together, and this one happened later. What's interesting is that this GP then manages to expose something about the satirized comment that I may not have realized otherwise. I don't want to offend Azuma because I was starting to recognize her name and like her comments in general, but I think my second paragraph applies to the original comment as well, if not as obviously.

            --
            If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
      • (Score: 3, Funny) by Azuma Hazuki on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:49PM

        by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:49PM (#391218) Journal

        You can 1) credit me properly when you steal my stuff and 2) think a little before you try that; there is NOT the kind of equivalency here you think there is, and your lazy, half-assed attempt to take someone else's point and try to turn it around makes you look very foolish indeed...

        --
        I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @02:45AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @02:45AM (#391425)

      communists? are you Retard Paul or what?

  • (Score: 4, Funny) by Runaway1956 on Sunday August 21 2016, @12:37PM

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday August 21 2016, @12:37PM (#391004) Journal

    Last time I looked, The Mighty BUzzard and I were about the most troll-moderated people here.

    If this guy has any idea what he's talking about, TMB and I are saving Soylent for everyone. No need to thank us, unless you're sincere. If you're really sincere, just buy us a beer or sixty.

    • (Score: 3, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @01:26PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @01:26PM (#391016)

      LOL, these dolts speak of their "troll-fu" in front of me, AC the Magnificent.

    • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Francis on Sunday August 21 2016, @01:32PM

      by Francis (5544) on Sunday August 21 2016, @01:32PM (#391018)

      I kind of wonder about that, Buzzie being modded doesn't really surprise me, but unlike some folks, *coughkhallowcough* at least he contributes something of value.

      The folks I don't get are the ones that post bullshit day in and day out and are too lazy to even bother to think about what they're saying.

      • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:05PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:05PM (#391195)

        The folks I don't get are the ones that post bullshit day in and day out and are too lazy to even bother to think about what they're saying.

        Something else Francis does not get! Perhaps the accusation of intellectual sloth is on the other foot?

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @04:16PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @04:16PM (#391066)

      How about we'll buy the two of you some weed, which will put you in a good mood for the brain surgery.

    • (Score: 2) by mojo chan on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:21PM

      by mojo chan (266) on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:21PM (#391099)

      Milo is a FSW - Free Speech Warrior. He wants be able to say anything he likes, free from consequences. Sorry, but freedom of speech requires that others can respond with criticism or by ostracising or by kicking him off their private services/property.

      Just screaming "free speech!!! censorship!!1!" whenever anyone blocks him or boots him off Twitter is professional victimhood.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:52PM

        You're seeing things through a pretty thick filter there. For starters, he said getting the boot from Twitter was one of the best things that could have happened for him and one of the worst for Twitter. As for getting no-platformed by the snowflakes on campus, that's not about his free speech as much as it is pointing out the hypocrisy of a campus that is supposed to be pro-free-speech refusing to listen to anyone the faculty disagree with, despite a significant number of the students wanting to hear what he has to say. Universities have gone from fighting the establishment to being the establishment.

        --
        My rights don't end where your fear begins.
        • (Score: 2) by mojo chan on Sunday August 21 2016, @06:21PM

          by mojo chan (266) on Sunday August 21 2016, @06:21PM (#391129)

          He would claim that being banned from Twitter was good for him. It's not, it cuts down his public profile outside of Breibart and other shitpost sites where few people bother going.

          He thinks that because people he dislikes are "professional victims" and it worked out well for them, he should do it to. Thing is, they aren't doing well because they are victims, they are doing well because they produce high quality content that people want.

          --
          const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
          • (Score: 2, Troll) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday August 21 2016, @11:24PM

            they are doing well because they produce high quality content that people want.

            Sarkessian ever finish up those six videos she accepted tons of kickstarter money for or is she still at three like she was a year after taking the money?

            --
            My rights don't end where your fear begins.
            • (Score: 2, Informative) by mojo chan on Monday August 22 2016, @07:59AM

              by mojo chan (266) on Monday August 22 2016, @07:59AM (#391500)

              Why yes, she actually made way, way more than six videos and the series is still on-going. The latest was posted last month. She has more than delivered on the Kickstarter promise, and in fact has turned it into a viable charity.

              --
              const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
              • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday August 22 2016, @02:31PM

                Interesting. Last I saw she had plans to release little bitty videos under an entirely different kickstarter and no word on finishing out the original, paid for series.

                --
                My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                • (Score: 2) by mojo chan on Monday August 22 2016, @03:19PM

                  by mojo chan (266) on Monday August 22 2016, @03:19PM (#391673)

                  She finished the original Kickstarter offering about a year ago, this is just "season 2" bonus material now. She, or rather now the charity she set up, did another Kickstarter for some different videos that are in production now. Since the charity has a number of employees, and Anita isn't the only one doing videos for it, and this new series seems to have a lot of guest speakers, and she is doing it full time now, it doesn't seem like a stretch.

                  --
                  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
                  • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday August 22 2016, @06:48PM

                    Interesting. Six full videos not just little five minute vids? Cause she was seriously dragging ass and it was starting to look about as truthful as the time she said she was run out of her house by death threats, which she filmed while inside her house.

                    --
                    My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                    • (Score: 2) by mojo chan on Monday August 22 2016, @10:43PM

                      by mojo chan (266) on Monday August 22 2016, @10:43PM (#391907)

                      Yep, all full videos delivered, shorter ones (5-15 minutes) still on-going. Also, the allegations about the video turned out to be false, just the usual reddit crap.

                      --
                      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
                      • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday August 22 2016, @10:48PM

                        Going to need a link to that because I saw quite a thorough examination that proved pretty conclusively that she never left her home.

                        --
                        My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                        • (Score: 2) by mojo chan on Tuesday August 23 2016, @08:27AM

                          by mojo chan (266) on Tuesday August 23 2016, @08:27AM (#392033)

                          If you provide a link to this examination I can refuse it. I can't prove a negative, and most people don't bother to careful document being threatened out of their home just in case random people on Reddit question it.

                          These claims are usually easy to dismantle because they rarely do a very good job of faking the evidence. Tweets frequently exceed the 140 character limit, they forget to remove Photoshop metadata tags from the images etc.

                          --
                          const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
          • (Score: 2) by cubancigar11 on Monday August 22 2016, @04:08AM

            by cubancigar11 (330) on Monday August 22 2016, @04:08AM (#391448) Homepage Journal

            Except that mass exodus of conservatives from Twitter is already happening. Good or bad, Milo's article has 977 comments and he is not on twitter. You may not like it but he is not a small fish anymore, at least. He was banned for exactly this reason, btw, because he is not a small fish anymore.

            • (Score: 2) by mojo chan on Monday August 22 2016, @08:03AM

              by mojo chan (266) on Monday August 22 2016, @08:03AM (#391503)

              Try setting up your own Free Speech social media platform for conservatives. The Amazing Atheist tried and failed, because he found that no hosting provider was willing to ignore the law and that advertisers wouldn't touch a site like that, but maybe you could Kickstarter it or something?!

              Seriously, good luck with that. It would be a comedy gold mine, better than the MGTOW and Red Pill on Reddit.

              --
              const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
              • (Score: 2) by cubancigar11 on Monday August 22 2016, @03:11PM

                by cubancigar11 (330) on Monday August 22 2016, @03:11PM (#391665) Homepage Journal

                It is the work of liberals and it is what's going to become their undoing. Men's rights is a valid problem but liberals have sold it to women vote-bank. There are plenty of poor white people who have valid concerns but liberals would rather pander to black racists than non-racists white. Owing to your two-party system, multiple people have now been cornered to stand with conservatives. And that involves standing-up with white supremacists and fascists so be it.

                And what has that bought you? Silicon valley is a business world and it will pander to whoever is in power. Currently liberals are in power. Let's see... Trump is bigger than tea-party... hmm... Hillary is already saying that men's rights are a valid concern... feminists are already saying "we need to listen to men's concern"... NOW is saying father's are getting a short-end of the justice system... Conservatives in London are supporting Men's Rights Movement.

                All that in lieu of twitter. I say it is a win-win situation. So much win, actually. And all because of liberals couldn't care less about men committing suicide in unprecedented numbers and used them for laughter.

                • (Score: 2) by mojo chan on Monday August 22 2016, @03:30PM

                  by mojo chan (266) on Monday August 22 2016, @03:30PM (#391683)

                  Well, I keep being accused of being a liberal, and I support men's rights. I just don't support MRAs, because they are idiots who are trying to make the situation worse and blaming the only thing that can help them.

                  --
                  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
                  • (Score: 2) by cubancigar11 on Monday August 22 2016, @04:12PM

                    by cubancigar11 (330) on Monday August 22 2016, @04:12PM (#391702) Homepage Journal

                    I support men's rights.

                    What have you done to stop its state sponsored violation?

                    idiots who are trying to make the situation worse

                    By doing what?

                    blaming the only thing that can help them

                    What that is, exactly?

                    • (Score: 2) by mojo chan on Monday August 22 2016, @04:58PM

                      by mojo chan (266) on Monday August 22 2016, @04:58PM (#391723)

                      Campaigned against MGM, feminism and feminism.

                      --
                      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
        • (Score: 2) by naubol on Sunday August 21 2016, @06:40PM

          by naubol (1918) on Sunday August 21 2016, @06:40PM (#391146)

          I miss the days when free speech violation could only mean being no-platformed by the government.

          • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday August 21 2016, @11:27PM

            It never meant that. That would be a first amendment violation. Say it with me so you'll understand next time: free speech is not just a first amendment thing, it is a founding American principle.

            --
            My rights don't end where your fear begins.
            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @02:01AM

              by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @02:01AM (#391398)

              Yes a founding principle that they just forgot about at the start and needed an amendment to slip it in later. At least it was kinda more important than owning slaves.

              • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday August 22 2016, @02:22AM

                At least it was kinda more important than owning slaves.

                Oooh, yeah, give me that salt. Please. Go right ahead and ignore that we also killed a hell of a lot of white folks to rectify that. What matters is that the founders weren't perfect and thus it's okay to ignore anything they may have gotten absolutely right.

                --
                My rights don't end where your fear begins.
            • (Score: 3, Insightful) by dry on Monday August 22 2016, @02:33AM

              by dry (223) on Monday August 22 2016, @02:33AM (#391420) Journal

              You should really read some history if you think that Free Speech was a founding American principle. Generally during the Revolution, people who spoke against it were tarred and feathered, had their property taken by letters of attainment issued by the colonial governments and later, hung from a tree by Mr Lynch and friends.
              The idea that the lower classes, the slaves and the Tories (the right wing party of the day) should have free speech was foreign to the ruling classes.
              The founding principles of America are best expressed in a famous document that starts out claiming all men being equal and then goes on to classify some men as 3/5s of a man.

              • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday August 22 2016, @02:40AM

                You really should get over slavery. Nobody born in this century's great-grandparents were or owned slaves.

                --
                My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                • (Score: 2) by dry on Monday August 22 2016, @04:08AM

                  by dry (223) on Monday August 22 2016, @04:08AM (#391447) Journal

                  You are the one who brought up "founding principles", not current principles. Speech is one of the rights that has generally become more free with the passing of time. Perhaps eventually we'll get to the point where people aren't thrown in jail for speech.

                  • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday August 22 2016, @02:47PM

                    Has it? Doesn't look that way to me. Forty years ago you could hold most any political view and speak about it on campus without the faculty or administration trying to silence you. Eight years ago you could be a whistleblower and not end up in prison for it. At the beginning of the Internet age you could spout any political view you liked and not get censored as long as you did it in a forum that was somewhat related to what you were saying. Today? All of the above: gone.

                    --
                    My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @12:10PM

                  by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @12:10PM (#391577)

                  You really should get over slavery. Nobody born in this century's great-grandparents were or owned slaves.

                  Just because it's made illegal, does not mean it stops happening, if there is demand. Slavery still occurs today, even in the US.
                  And I don't mean "my employer doesn't pay me enough!" millennial whinging. I mean the real, traditional, old-school your-ass-is-mine kind of slavery. You're not likely to see them though, because modern slaves don't work in the fields.

                • (Score: 2) by cafebabe on Thursday August 25 2016, @01:10PM

                  by cafebabe (894) on Thursday August 25 2016, @01:10PM (#392967) Journal

                  I distinctly remember an episode of Michael Moore's TV Nation which featured slaves. Apparently, they made it legally watertight.

                  --
                  1702845791×2
            • (Score: 2) by naubol on Monday August 22 2016, @11:04PM

              by naubol (1918) on Monday August 22 2016, @11:04PM (#391919)

              What does it mean? If I have a platform, I'm obligated to let you speak on it? If that's what you mean by 'free speech', I say no thank you.

              • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday August 22 2016, @11:14PM

                Absolutely not. It's your platform. If it's a public forum that belongs to you though, just don't be surprised when called on being an oppressive asshat if you're going to be an oppressive asshat. Most especially if you're supposed to fundamentally be about the free and unhindered exchange of ideas, like say a university.

                --
                My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                • (Score: 2) by naubol on Tuesday August 23 2016, @12:00AM

                  by naubol (1918) on Tuesday August 23 2016, @12:00AM (#391939)

                  The idea of giving free and unhindered exchange of ideas doesn't strike you as facially absurd? There are so many bad ideas. Should a university give a platform to a flat earther? Universities want to improve the quality of ideas, yes? There must be a selection mechanism and room to get it wrong. As for hindrance, universities are suppose to provide friction for shitty thinking. Hindrance is desirable.

                  • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday August 23 2016, @12:40AM

                    by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Tuesday August 23 2016, @12:40AM (#391947) Homepage Journal

                    Why would you not give them a platform? Are you afraid of them? Will your own ideas not obviously prove them wrong? Seriously, if you ideas cannot stand debate, it's safe to consider them just flat wrong. This is how universities used to work and how they still should.

                    --
                    My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                    • (Score: 2) by naubol on Tuesday August 23 2016, @11:26AM

                      by naubol (1918) on Tuesday August 23 2016, @11:26AM (#392070)

                      signal to noise matters

                      • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday August 23 2016, @01:29PM

                        by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Tuesday August 23 2016, @01:29PM (#392106) Homepage Journal

                        No, it absolutely does not. That idea is fascist garbage designed to set those in power up as the ones who decide what qualifies as 'noise' and allows them to both censor something and declare it utterly unworth hearing. You either allow the most absurd ideas or you get fitted for jackboots. There is no middle ground.

                        --
                        My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                        • (Score: 2) by naubol on Tuesday August 30 2016, @11:59AM

                          by naubol (1918) on Tuesday August 30 2016, @11:59AM (#395218)

                          Why is there no middle ground?

                          • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday August 30 2016, @12:36PM

                            by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Tuesday August 30 2016, @12:36PM (#395231) Homepage Journal

                            Because as soon as there becomes "middle ground" there has to be someone who gets to decide what constitutes speech that can be censored. Since you have to have a human making that decision and humans have an abysmal record of corruption when given power, you cannot give that power to anyone or allow yourself to have it.

                            Thus our policy here of allowing all speech that isn't mass, commercial spam. Since we are humans, we're open to corruption even here. Thankfully we have widely varied ideologies except on the matter of free speech and someone is always ready to call bullshit on any attempted censorship.

                            This is not even remotely true on most campuses nowadays. They are fully ready to censor any speech they disagree with.

                            --
                            My rights don't end where your fear begins.
    • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @07:35PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @07:35PM (#391175)

      Sometimes you are a troll for the greater good.

      Others, you're just an asshole.

    • (Score: 3, Interesting) by tfried on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:31PM

      by tfried (5534) on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:31PM (#391206)

      Ok, granted. Being called a troll could mean you're simply swimming hard against the mainstream. Or it could not. In my unwritten book, the core definition of being a "troll" is pissing off others, deliberately. An important connotation of that is that - in general - pissing off others is the main point of being a troll, whereas the method chosen is secondary.

      So what are possible reasons for being called a troll?
      1) People disagree with you, strongly, and are too immature to tolerate your opinion, possibly even for lack of counter-arguments. <-- You hope to be here.
      2) People disagree with you, but would have been ok with your statement if you had simply left out the ad hominem. <-- Doesn't make your ideas any worse, but you probably haven't convinced anybody, either.
      3) People agree with you, but reject your statement for too much offensive language. <-- Mostly theoretical category, listed for completeness. People just aren't that reasonable.
      4) People think your statement is so obviously designed to be offensive, that they do not even think you believe in any of what you said. <-- Proper use of the word "troll" according to my above defintion; of course this still does not rule out that the audience has guessed wrong, and you actually were trying to make a point.

      I won't guess on the proportions, make up your own statistics. My point is: It is not necessarily bad to be called a troll, but it's quite a leap of faith to take pride in being called a troll.

      As to "troll" being used mostly by the left: Probably true. That's simply because for case 1), above, the alt-right prefers the term "SJW".

  • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @01:05PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @01:05PM (#391012)

    >In the United States, as late as the 1880s most States set the minimum age at 10-12, (in Delaware it was 7 in 1895).[8] Inspired by the "Maiden Tribute" female reformers in the US initiated their own campaign[9] which petitioned legislators to raise the legal minimum age to at least 16, with the ultimate goal to raise the age to 18. The campaign was successful, with almost all states raising the minimum age to 16-18 years by 1920.

    >Also: see: De_t_r_nomy chapter 22 verses 28-29, hebrew allows men to rape girl children and keep them: thus man + girl is obviously fine. Feminists are commanded to be killed as anyone enticing others to follow another ruler/judge/god is to be killed as-per Deuteronomy. It is wonderful when this happens from time to time: celebrate)

    • (Score: 0, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @01:15PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @01:15PM (#391013)

      +1 Troll

    • (Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @01:37PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @01:37PM (#391019)

      Challenge for you, AC. Explain to all of us why you even WANT to have sex with a prepubescent girl. Really, WTF is so interesting about little baby girls? They don't have the function, the equipment isn't even developed yet. Many a two to twelve year old child has looked at Daddy's thing, and questioned what it is, and why it is. Curiosity is natural. But, none of those little children expresses more than curiosity. They don't want sexual intercourse with you.

      So - it's all about YOU, right? It's about YOUR NEED to - do what, exactly? The child can't return your interest, beyond mere curiosity. So, what are you doing?

      Explain it. Why do you want to hurt a little baby girl? Why do you feel the need to USE a little girl?

      • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @03:38PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @03:38PM (#391054)

        Many female children are cute and pretty, also nice *
        They have both positive social traits and look good.

        *(note: possibly doesn't apply the "shart in mart" 'murricans)

        Adult women try to mimic female children via cosmetics:
        Blemishless skin.
        No under arm hair.
        No pubic hair.
        No body odor
        Small pores.
        Large eyes (in cosmetics this is done via kohl/eyeliner)

        Female children also will obey the man and bond with him.
        Women mimic young girls to marry and then dump duped males.

        The God of De_ter_nomy is fine with man + female child. It's very clear in the hebrew.
        Yes, girls are for USEing by the man the man is 'ba'al': master.

        This is anathema to the modern USA+Europe religion (which is currently on a crusade and bombing every culture that still has man as the master of women and girls).

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @03:18PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @03:18PM (#391044)

      "De_t_r_nomy"

      Who's that pokemon?

    • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:53PM

      by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:53PM (#391221) Journal

      Hello again Mikee :) Come kill me like you said you would; I've been waiting for you. You won't, of course. You won't even try. Why? Because you're weak, stupid, and above all cowardly. Also hung like a fruit fly; MY dick is bigger than yours and it's a clitoris.

      --
      I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @08:03AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @08:03AM (#391504)

        Some woman cunts again.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @12:50PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @12:50PM (#391594)

      Is your bolt really that small?

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 23 2016, @10:16AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 23 2016, @10:16AM (#392054)

        "must have small dik if like pretty young girls"

        "real men fuck other men: real men do what is difficult and disgusting!"

        Fucking cattle.

  • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Gravis on Sunday August 21 2016, @02:03PM

    by Gravis (4596) on Sunday August 21 2016, @02:03PM (#391020)

    Even conservatives are buying into it.

    When your own party turns on you, you should really consider the possibility that there is a large chunk of truth behind what is being said.

    Witness, in the days since Breitbart executive chairman Stephen K. Bannon was announced as Donald Trump's campaign manager, how establishment stooges have bought into the worst smear-tactics of the left. As with the left, nothing is evaluated on its quality, or whether it's factually accurate, thought-provoking or even amusing: only whether it can be deemed sexist, racist or homophobic.

    Let's be honest here, Trump started his campaign by stating that Mexicans are rapists and has only continued making inflammatory statements since. He's sinking his campaign all on his own and blaming people for talking about such things is disingenuous.

    Campuses are where the illness takes its most severe form. Students running for safe spaces at the slightest hint of a challenge to their coddled worldview. Faculties and administrations desperately trying to sabotage visits from conservative speakers (often me!) to avoid the inevitable complaints from tearful lefty students.

    There are actually, are plenty explanations here. First of all, when he writes, "sabotage visits from conservative speakers (often me!)" it makes me wonder if is he actually talking about conservative speakers or just himself. Frankly, it seems likely that Milo is just an rude, curt and simply unlikable person if you don't share his point of view. There is also the possibility that faculties and administrations may not like people who are interested in instilling an ideology in people that leans toward cutting federal funding to colleges.

    Trolling has become a byword for everything the left disagrees with, particularly if it's boisterous, mischievous and provocative. Even straightforward political disagreement, not intended to provoke, is sometimes described as "trolling" by leftists who can't tell the difference between someone who doesn't believe as they do and an "abuser" or "harasser."

    It's all about presentation. For example if Milo responds to opinions with responses using terms like "false" and "wrong", he may not realize he's offending people because that's how he normally talks. Some people are just offensive and refuse to change their behavior and Milo seems like he may be one of those people.
     
     
    TL;DR: Milo has a problem with social norms and is whining about it.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @02:14PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @02:14PM (#391025)

      It's all about presentation. For example if Milo responds to opinions with responses using terms like "false" and "wrong", he may not realize he's offending people because that's how he normally talks. Some people are just offensive and refuse to change their behavior and Milo seems like he may be one of those people.

      It seems nearly certain that he's not unaware; that he's doing it deliberately in a cynical ploy to rally eyeballs and build his brand. After many warnings and "time-outs" he was finally perma-banned from twitter. His response? Celebration. And to say, “I thought I had another six months, but this was always going to happen.” [medium.com]

    • (Score: 2, Informative) by Runaway1956 on Sunday August 21 2016, @02:18PM

      by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday August 21 2016, @02:18PM (#391028) Journal

      "When your own party turns on you, you should really consider the possibility that there is a large chunk of truth behind what is being said."

      Considered, and dismissed for two reasons. First, the Republican party is not "Trump's party". Trump is simply not a Republican. Second, the Republican party has sold out repeatedly, and has no claim to any ideology.

      "Let's be honest here, Trump started his campaign by stating that Mexicans are rapists and has only continued making inflammatory statements since. He's sinking his campaign all on his own and blaming people for talking about such things is disingenuous."

      The single most inflammatory voice in American politics is that of Shrillary.

      "he may not realize he's offending people "

      Being offended is good for people. At the very least, it has the tendency to make them think a little. Yeah, I realize that most "progressives" resist the compulsion, but at least Milo tries.

      "TL;DR: Milo has a problem with social norms and is whining about it."

      Perhaps you didn't RTFA. You missed the part about "it’s only trolls who, thanks to their thick skins and their contempt for social norms, are able to drop bombs."

      • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @03:04PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @03:04PM (#391036)

        > First, the Republican party is not "Trump's party". Trump is simply not a Republican.

        Have you not been paying attention? Trump is the ultimate republican.
        The only difference is that he's willing to say out loud what they've been saying through subtext for decades.

        Take any standard republican position, amp it up to 11 and that's Trump's position.

        • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday August 21 2016, @03:43PM

          by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday August 21 2016, @03:43PM (#391056) Journal

          Then why do so many R's hate him? Or, more accurately, why do so many party officials hate him?

          Trump is not going to advance the party - Trump is going to advance Trump, and incidentally, maybe he will promote the "American People".

          • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @03:51PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @03:51PM (#391058)

            > why do so many party officials hate him?

            (a) The rank and file define the party, not the officials
            (b) The officials hate him because he doesn't play coy like they do. He lays bare the ugliness that has been at the heart of the party for decades and that ugliness drives away voters who have been on the margins.

            • (Score: 3, Informative) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:03PM

              (a) The rank and file define the party, not the officials

              Bullshit. The ones making the decisions define the party and we the people get left without recourse if they decide to fuck us.

              --
              My rights don't end where your fear begins.
              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:57PM

                by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:57PM (#391117)

                > The ones making the decisions define the party and we the people get left without recourse if they decide to fuck us.

                Then leave the party.
                If you choose to stay then that means you accept those decisions.
                A party that is all leaders and no followers is no party at all.
                You, mr individualism above all else, should know that.

                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @06:06PM

                  by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @06:06PM (#391124)

                  Funny how that applies to Trump but not Saunders.

                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @06:15PM

                    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @06:15PM (#391128)

                    What's your point? Nobody is making the bernie or bust people stay in the party. If you disagree so strongly with the core party beliefs then you should absolutely leave for a party that you do agree with.

                    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @07:24PM

                      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @07:24PM (#391168)

                      You seem to be conveniently forgetting the whole conspiracy by the DNC to sabotage the Saunders campaign.

                      Truly the will of the rank and file there.

                      And how many times have we seen the very public prostrations of Bernie supporters holding there noses and voting for Hillary just. one. more. time (*cough*Nader*cough*).

                      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:53PM

                        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:53PM (#391220)

                        > You seem to be conveniently forgetting the whole conspiracy by the DNC to sabotage the Saunders campaign.

                        You mean a couple of excitable people in the DNC talking smack about sanders?

                        Yeah, yuuuuge conspiracy. Totally hijacked the entire process.

                        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @12:17PM

                          by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @12:17PM (#391579)

                          Wasn't one of those "couple of excitable people" the person in charge of the party?
                          It doesn't take a large number of people to make a conspiracy, it only requires two.

                          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @02:03PM

                            by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @02:03PM (#391624)

                            No it wasn't. As the person in charge she should have slapped it down though.
                            That was a failure of leadership and is why she got the boot.

                • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday August 21 2016, @11:15PM

                  I do, sweety. Which is why I belong to no party.

                  --
                  My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                  • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @02:24AM

                    by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @02:24AM (#391411)

                    What a lame-ass cop-out answer.
                    No one thought we were talking about you in the specific.
                    Just shed your fragile ego and admit you made a poorly thought through argument.

                    • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday August 22 2016, @02:30AM

                      I know, right? What in the world would possess anyone to think they were being spoken to when you hit reply to their comment?

                      --
                      My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @04:14AM

                        by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @04:14AM (#391451)

                        You were the one who started with the royal "we."

                        > The ones making the decisions define the party and we the people get left without recourse if they decide to fuck us.

                        It is funny how you just can't admit you're wrong. What's gonna happen? Does your world implode if you say it?
                        Are you so rigid that a single crack in the facade must inevitably leads to a total crack-up?

            • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Sunday August 21 2016, @06:54PM

              by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday August 21 2016, @06:54PM (#391155) Journal

              Oooh! I'll jump right on that one!

              The "rank and file" have told the officials to go screw themselves, this time around. The "party", the officials, DO NOT WANT TRUMP!! We all know that. But, your "rank and file" insisted on Trump, holding him out to be better than any of the - what was it, 17 alternatives offered by the party?

              That's the "revolution" I've mentioned in the past.

              The other party had it's own "revolution", but the party officials quashed it. They ramrodded through the party choice, and told the voters they could all get fucked.

              So - which is better, the D's or the R's?

              I'm still voting for Stein. I don't want to vote for the lesser evil. Stein may not be great, but at least she is "good".

              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @07:02PM

                by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @07:02PM (#391160)

                What is your point?
                You now seem to be agreeing that trump is the ultimate republican.

                But you do seem to be disagreeing that clinton won the popular vote.
                She got ~17M, Sanders got ~13M.

                But nothing is stopping bernie voters from going to some other party.

                • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday August 21 2016, @07:24PM

                  by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday August 21 2016, @07:24PM (#391169) Journal

                  Well, you defined what you meant. Yes, I'll have to agree that Trump appeals to the rank and file Republicans. He most certainly is not the "ultimate Republican" from the standpoint of party officials, which is what I thought you meant earlier.

            • (Score: 1, Troll) by Azuma Hazuki on Sunday August 21 2016, @09:00PM

              by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Sunday August 21 2016, @09:00PM (#391228) Journal

              Yyyyyyyup. Drumpf is the collective karma of 50 years of the Republican party deciding their voter base was going to be the kind of person who pronounces "African-American" with two Gs in it. Among many, many other sins. If he did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him.

              --
              I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:07PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:07PM (#391092)

            Because they don't want all their dirty linen out in the open where the thinking people may see it. The undecided or non racists idiots. Republicans still need some normal people to vote for them to boost their numbers. There just aren't enough crazies...Yet.

      • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:55PM

        by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:55PM (#391223) Journal

        Trump isnae and cannae be a trrroo Scotsman, ye ken, seein' as how the scunner puts MILK in his porridge! Crivens!

        --
        I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @02:25PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @02:25PM (#391029)

      False.

    • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @03:05PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @03:05PM (#391038)

      Offense is taken, not given.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @02:54PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @02:54PM (#391035)

    OK, I'll probably get down modded for this.

    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @03:14PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @03:14PM (#391041)

      Yeah, I'd rather live in a corrupt society than a racist one.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @03:21PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @03:21PM (#391047)

        ^^ +3, Insightful

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @04:56PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @04:56PM (#391086)

          + 3 auto-fellatio

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @03:44PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @03:44PM (#391057)

        That's about stupid. A corrupt society will also be racist, won't it?

        • (Score: 2) by HiThere on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:46PM

          by HiThere (866) Subscriber Badge on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:46PM (#391109) Journal

          A corrupt society CAN be racist, and a racist society can be corrupt. There is no contradiction between the claims, but there's also no necessary connection. The two are statistically independent variables. (There is, or seems to be, a slight correlation, but it's not a strong one, and is probably due to nepotism, which isn't really racism.)

          P.S.: The above is just my opinion based only on observation. It doesn't have a study behind it, but it does have reading various histories and following the news for a few decades.

          --
          Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @06:04AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @06:04AM (#391478)

          A racist society is likely to be corrupt (can't have niggers getting ahead now can we? even if we have to break a few rules, as long as those filthy niggers are kept in their place) but a corrupt one isn't any more likely to be racist.

      • (Score: 4, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:05PM

        Then vote against collectivism and for individualism. Racism is one of the oldest forms of collectivism and is absolutely precluded by a staunch individualist mindset.

        --
        My rights don't end where your fear begins.
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @02:08AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @02:08AM (#391400)

          Because all the staunch individualist Republicans aren't racist at all !!

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @04:53AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @04:53AM (#391468)

          Racism is one of the oldest forms of collectivism and is absolutely precluded by a staunch individualist mindset.

          Remember folks, this is the guy who said it is totally justified to discriminate against people with black sounding names because it means they are probably stupid.

    • (Score: 1) by Sulla on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:29PM

      by Sulla (5173) on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:29PM (#391102) Journal

      I just happen to agree with the left of the early. 2000s in calling Bush/Cheney a war criminal. By the same arguments Hillary is one too. And I for one will not vote for anyone who has voted for war, conflict, and death. I guess Libya wasn't a vote though, she specifically said the decision is hers to make and not the legislatures.

      Probably won't vote for Trump, but hell if I will vote for Hillary.

      --
      Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @03:04PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @03:04PM (#391037)

    Not going to agree or disagree on the premise if we are a 'society of haters', but societal interactions should be a reflection of society, or its a farce.

    • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @03:27PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @03:27PM (#391050)

      societal interactions should be a reflection of society, or its a farce.

      The Milgram / Stanford Prision experiments have had their findings repeated and validated. That is that over 60% of humans are feeble minded morons who will accept whatever they are told and behave accordingly. This is why the current debates over freedom of speech are so important. It is correct and necessary to defend against censorious, hypocritical leftists who fail to realise that the erosion of our freedoms and moral values (ultimately the destruction of western civilisation) is in the interests of those they should be opposed to.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @04:24PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @04:24PM (#391070)

        I really hate to ask this. Yet it has to be done.
        Define 'moral values' and how their change from how they are currently viewed will destroy western civilisation?

        Example, pre early to mid 20th century at the latest, It was still common for multiple generations of a family to live in a single household. Grandparents, parents, kids, and grand kids. This was considered moral, the bedrock of civilization. Then the nuclear family came about here in the united states. Ushered in by promises from the government to ww2 vets of a cheap house and tract of land. It was promoted that kids should be kicked out at 18 to find their own way and the elderly should be hidden. Then it took over in other western nations because it was viewed as part of the reason of the great economic success that happened to the country post ww2 till now.

        I am certain there were people who claimed then what you are claiming now, deviation from the moral conscious. Or what 'your' group considers it as, is viewed as a threat to the very bedrock of civilization and must be fought.

        • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:36PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:36PM (#391211)

          Define 'moral values' and how their change from how they are currently viewed will destroy western civilisation?

          No problem. Cultural Marxism must be considered immoral (as Kant's immorality of morality) as it is an attempt to undermine majority social mores and empower unhealthy minorities over the typically more balanced views held by the majority. I myself would have been considered a social liberal until recently, however I am also a white, "cis-gendered" (wtf) male which now means I can be attacked by "victims" who I have never oppressed or harmed in any way. This is plain intolerance. It is the exact opposite of what safe-space seeking, permanently offended, virtue signalling snowflakes claim to be doing. Playing the victim and projecting your behaviour onto others is the defining characteristic of sociopathy. Such behaviour has now been normalised.

          What moral defence is there for those covering up rape committed by muslim migrants in Europe? Our so called progressives are openly making exceptions for an oppressive and regressive religious ideology that is entirely at odds with centuries of western social progress. The same whatever-wave feminists who harp on about "rape culture" would rather turn a blind eye than risk being accused of racism. The absolute intellectual and moral failure of Western society is upon us!

  • (Score: 5, Touché) by pe1rxq on Sunday August 21 2016, @03:18PM

    by pe1rxq (844) on Sunday August 21 2016, @03:18PM (#391045) Homepage

    I enjoy slashdot more and more lately. Especially when moronic stuff like this seems to become the norm.
    It is not fair that some are allowed to troll in the stories while I can only moderate comments.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @03:28PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @03:28PM (#391051)

      Submissions like this are like the day the substitute teacher shows up in sixth grade.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @04:41PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @04:41PM (#391076)

      So Buzz helped save the world, but killed SN at the same time?

    • (Score: 3, Informative) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday August 21 2016, @04:55PM

      You think it requires special consideration to get a story up that disagrees with a previous story? What site are you reading because it's certainly not SN.

      --
      My rights don't end where your fear begins.
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @06:06PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @06:06PM (#391123)

        You realize the previous story was a hate-submit, the goal being exactly the same as your submission of this story.
        There was no disagreement.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @07:50PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @07:50PM (#391186)

          Yeah, show me where Ethanol-fueled commented once through the entire affair. Or Runaway. Or TMB.

          But boy did it get intellectually bankrupt to circle the wagons and sucking each others dicks to defend against the supposed trolls here not making a showing at all.

          It's only trolling when the other side does it.

          Got it.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:58PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:58PM (#391226)

            > Yeah, show me where Ethanol-fueled commented once through the entire affair. Or Runaway. Or TMB.

            What does that even matter? Ethan submitted the story with passive-aggressive commentary.
            Maybe they just weren't online when it went live. Lots of stories don't get comments by any of them.
            The lack or presence of them in the comments means nothing.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @03:43PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @03:43PM (#391055)

    So what if someone throws up a acid opinion on the internet. I ignore them. Half the problem with trolls on the internet is the whiny victims who can't just ignore them and give them greater power.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @04:11PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @04:11PM (#391063)

      > So what if someone throws up a acid opinion on the internet. I ignore them.

      Apparently not, else you wouldn't have posted.

  • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @04:31PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @04:31PM (#391073)

    These are the same conservatives who weep about precious Christian values, the War on Xmas and Southern heritage?

    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Username on Sunday August 21 2016, @07:41PM

      by Username (4557) on Sunday August 21 2016, @07:41PM (#391182)

      Yes, the cuckolded ones.

      PS: Southern heritage is a Democrat thing. Republicans come from the north. You know, the damn yankees who usurped the Democratic president Jefferson Davis.

  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Zz9zZ on Sunday August 21 2016, @04:55PM

    by Zz9zZ (1348) on Sunday August 21 2016, @04:55PM (#391082)

    He does have a small nugget of truth in there, that people should grow a little thicker skin and have some more honest conversations, but...

    Trolling ruins debates, you can never tell when someone states a belief and when they're just trying to get a rise out of someone. Making people angry is actually the worst method of dropping "bombs", and using that phrase shows what Milo is really about. When you make someone angry their brain switches to more emotional rationalizing and it becomes a war of beliefs. Some people just want to watch the world burn...

    Trolls make the party lines dig deeper, and the original, culturally sanctioned trolls have always been called "comedians". Internet trolling is only good for getting someone else to drop their own truth bomb by letting everyone know how crazy they are, exposing the whack jobs. Milo and friends are the world burning types, nothing contributed except outrage and controversy.

    --
    ~Tilting at windmills~
    • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:16PM

      people should grow a little thicker skin

      Understatement of the year. When you feel the need to call for censorship because your feels are hurt that someone had a difference of opinion, you need a massively thicker skin.

      --
      My rights don't end where your fear begins.
      • (Score: 2) by Zz9zZ on Monday August 22 2016, @01:05AM

        by Zz9zZ (1348) on Monday August 22 2016, @01:05AM (#391374)

        No, the calls for censorship are few and far between, and I would bet dollars to donuts that most actual censorship pleas come from organizations with a serious agenda. People have called for censorship since time immemorial, though it is often the type of censorship that ends with flowers...

        The more important point I brought up is that Milo is a self-serving narcissist who over values his worth to society. He's up there with "it's just a prank bro" ethan dumberry.

        --
        ~Tilting at windmills~
        • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday August 22 2016, @01:15AM

          The more important point I brought up is that Milo is a self-serving narcissist who over values his worth to society.

          Well, yeah. I mean that's pretty blatantly obvious to anyone who's ever listened to him. Doesn't make him either wrong or less entertaining though.

          No, the calls for censorship are few and far between, and I would bet dollars to donuts that most actual censorship pleas come from organizations with a serious agenda.

          You must be using another internet than I do. And another site besides SN for that matter.

          --
          My rights don't end where your fear begins.
          • (Score: 2) by Zz9zZ on Monday August 22 2016, @02:40AM

            by Zz9zZ (1348) on Monday August 22 2016, @02:40AM (#391422)

            Hmm, no trolling is not entertaining unless you are also a troll who enjoys other people's torment.

            As for calls to censorship, haven't seen too many around here, though there are plenty of requests asking people yo knock off certain behaviors. A request / shout down != censorship. Happens on both "sides". So weird how we humans are so dualistic...

            --
            ~Tilting at windmills~
            • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday August 22 2016, @02:58PM

              There aren't too many, no, but they do occur regularly. "I'm being harassed, do something about it", "Start banning trolls", and "Start banning <some group that pissed me off>" occur every month or two and we're again forced to say "get fucked" except more politely and in a more professional phrasing.

              --
              My rights don't end where your fear begins.
  • (Score: 2) by fritsd on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:47PM

    by fritsd (4586) on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:47PM (#391110) Journal

    In other words:

    Successful Internet troll Milo [medium.com] demonstrates outrage against discrimination of the trolls swimming against the tide.

    Also, anyone who disagrees with me is a troll, because I'm leftist :-)

    Apropos, I found that link on Jeremiah Cornelius's [soylentnews.org] journal here at Soylentnews, I normally don't even read those, but that was a belly-aching shocking read.
    Thanks for the horror story, J.C. from Soylentnews, and of course Laurie Penny from medium.com. Although Penny is a bit mean about Geert's haircut.

  • (Score: 1) by stretch611 on Sunday August 21 2016, @07:00PM

    by stretch611 (6199) on Sunday August 21 2016, @07:00PM (#391158)

    I always thought https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ [youtube.com] was the best way to troll the internet.

    --
    Now with 5 covid vaccine shots/boosters altering my DNA :P
    • (Score: 2) by meustrus on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:34PM

      by meustrus (4961) on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:34PM (#391210)

      (ಠ_ಠ)

      --
      If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by shortscreen on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:02PM

    by shortscreen (2252) on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:02PM (#391194) Journal

    The other article smeared a broad group of people as "trolls." This time, people the author has a beef with are simply "the left."

    Is everyone who supports old school leftist causes like workers' rights and environmentalism automatically part of the PC police as well? I think not.

    This is how we end up with useless political discourse. Guilt by association. Strawmen. Lesser of two evils. etc.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:39PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:39PM (#391212)

      Um, no, the other article DID NOT smear a broad group of people as trolls.

      Unless you consider every ideology the author disagrees with as a broad group (here's a hint- they are to the right of him).

      A token gesture to appear fair-minded aside, the previous article couched 99.9999% of trolling as originating from a particular political class. Except everyone who isn't ideologically bound and has spent more than 5 minutes on the web knows it goes both ways.

      The opposite is not true however, as Milo freely accepts that he does in fact troll, and that's a good thing in maintaining the fringe for other less than popular opinions.

      One of the two is advocating for more speech, the other less.

      They are not even remotely similar.

      • (Score: 2) by shortscreen on Sunday August 21 2016, @09:03PM

        by shortscreen (2252) on Sunday August 21 2016, @09:03PM (#391234) Journal

        Um, no, the other article DID NOT smear a broad group of people as trolls.

        Unless you consider every ideology the author disagrees with as a broad group (here's a hint- they are to the right of him).

        I don't understand what you're trying to say here. Both "anyone who disagrees" and "anyone to the right" sound like very broad groups in my book.

        One of the two is advocating for more speech, the other less.

        Yes, and I favor free speech myself. Who is opposed to it? I guess Stein is, but he is not representative of the entire political left.

        The right has factions who advocate for censorship as well (against blasphemy, porn, anti-American speech, whatever). This is my whole point. You can't take an issue like free speech and frame it as left-vs.-right. It isn't. The venn diagram will end up looking like string theory.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @09:37PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @09:37PM (#391259)

          Was porn, blasphemy, or anti-American sentiments mentioned by either? Why bring it up then? If Stein was arguing against derogatory depictions of women, Islamophobia, NRA lobbying, the response would have still been the same. The ideologies involved matter less than as a justification as to why it is just and good when we do it.

          However, Stein does argue for censoring everything from MRAs to gamergate advocates to which there is no counterpart on the right except through proxy. That's not writing off a particular instance as trolling, but an entire viewpoint. And it originates from a particular side.

          This is exactly why leftist have been distancing themselves from this new breed of progressives, calling it the regressive left or SJWs.

          Again one side is arguing for more speech while the other is not.

          And when the Christian Right decides to try and ban porn, again, they will be mocked as well.

  • (Score: 2) by meustrus on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:47PM

    by meustrus (4961) on Sunday August 21 2016, @08:47PM (#391215)

    It's pretty interesting to see this latest evolution of the word "troll". Now that it has been inappropriately applied to political opponents rather than just troublemakers, the anti-PC "trolls" are now claiming the moniker with pride. SJWs take note: "Social Justice Warrior" does not have to be a dirty word. It is arguably a more positive term than "troll". I'd say to claim it with pride, but I'm not sure there's anybody on the other side of Milo that hasn't been doxxed out of the public sphere by the REAL trolls.

    I'm reminded of comments on the other story about various names the "alt-right" uses to "avoid engaging people", SJW just being the latest such term. Nobody could come up with one to describe anybody on the right that had the same sort of meaning. I think it's because when you start calling those people bad things, this is what happens, and the bad thing isn't so bad anymore. But people can turn Liberal into a dirty word even when plenty of people did claim it with pride, and then that word is gone. There's something messed up about that.

    --
    If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @02:25AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @02:25AM (#391413)

      >But people can turn Liberal into a dirty word even when plenty of people did claim it with pride, and then that word is gone.

      That makes a lot of sense. Liberals are bad because people experienced them, and they were bad (songs were made: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u52Oz-54VYw/ [youtube.com]). Trolls aren't as bad, because people experienced them, and most of them were not that bad.

    • (Score: 2) by gidds on Tuesday August 23 2016, @12:01PM

      by gidds (589) on Tuesday August 23 2016, @12:01PM (#392074)

      That's exactly what I was thinking.

      'Troll', like 'SJW', and many other terms, is simply a name you can call someone as an excuse for not engaging with them, not listening to them, and (most importantly) not thinking about what they say.

      It's childish, and if people only listen to people they agree with, then it leads to entrenched views, echo chambers, and people supporting views more because that's what they hear rather than as the result of any thinking.

      (I guess we're all prone to that, but different points of view are one of the best ways around that.)

      --
      [sig redacted]
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @09:26PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 21 2016, @09:26PM (#391250)

    Real trolls are not playing the same game as you. They are playing the game of 'piss you the fuck off'. They are then using your own beliefs against you to get themselves off.

    This sort of 'troll' is nothing more than a way to label someone to shut their argument down using strong words. The term SJW is similar.

    It seems the word troll is evolving into a different meaning. I blame those damn hackers! :)

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @12:25AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 22 2016, @12:25AM (#391357)

    Please acknowledge that trolling has no boundaries. It isn't a left vs right thing. If you don't, then you're just spouting one-sided bullshit to further your own agenda (aka trolling) so please shut the fuck up.