More childish leftism
-
I see that some ass clown left has once again targeted all of my posts, regardless of content, for downvoting.
You people are pathetic.
-
Due to the way, leftists abuse the downvoting posts of their enemies, while refusing to engage in any form of discussion, I have removed the downvote button.
Blindly downvoting posts, regardless of content, is their childish way of "punishing" their enemies.
Unfortunately, I wasn't able to find the section to completely remove the up/down voting system.
-
Much as I don't condone whoever's doing that, I think your behaviour is as childish as theirs.
You speak your mind on this forum (which is fine by me) and then get upset when you get a bad reaction. People have the right to react that way.It's like when Netflix got rid of the star-based rating system because Amy Schumer's special was getting pummelled by "far-right sexist trolls"! And much recently they removed all comments because some progressive shows had bad reviews.
I could also mention feminist youtubers like Anita Sarkeesian who block their comment section but I don't have all day.If you actually believe in what you say, stand tall and let people react the way they want however childish it is. You don't need to show them how triggered you got by their actions. Be the bigger person not the censor!
-
The difference is, I engage in discussion while the cowardly little liberals hide their faces. They are forum antifa thugs.
I don't mind leftists downvoting me when they have the balls to engage. When they follow me around and blindly downvote all my posts, regardless of content/subject, that's when it's a problem. It's a certain group of losers who do it.
Funny enough, the same group of losers who whine about the Reputation system (because they can't destroy my rep count), are the ones who abuse the downvoting system. They are the same ones who turned nasty to their own who, after months of prodding from me, finally condemned the violence on both sides.
-
Both of us got hit by the same loser, with this "angry" face. He/she/it (can't assume gender) did it so fast that the theyby couldn't have actually read any of the posts.
He/she/it has a history of doing this and rarely engages in any actual discussion.
-
Don't get me wrong, I understand where you're coming from and I'm not saying your anger isn't legitimate. All I'm saying is don't become the enemy here! There are enough censorious people as it is.
I am for free speech and downvoting is part of it in my opinion, even when used by cowards!
-
I don't censor speech unless they are liars, such as the guy who falsely claimed I called him a "faggot nigger". He admitted that I never said it or anything like it. But he kept on making BS lies.
Another one couldn't have a conversation, other than just sling 4 letter words at non-liberals.
Those are the only 2 that I have banned and muted, respectively, for discussion. I have muted people for forum spamming, but that's not the same.
I haven't done anything to the losers who use the Helpdesk or admin email to demand I be fired because I'm a genocidal nazi. When asked, they can't ever point to where I said anything even remotely like what they claim.
-
Just so everyone knows, one of my stalkers, WAFFLEZ, is the one who's following me around downvoting and "angry facing my posts regardless of content.
-
You've missed my point!
Removing the thumb down is censorious no matter the reason.
I don't censor speech unless they are liars,
Where is the lie in downvoting someone!? It's just feelings.
-
Blindly following me around the forums downvoting/angry facing all of my posts, regardless of content/subject, isn't speech.
If he grows some balls and engages in actual speech, then we wouldn't be here.
We could view his recent targetting of you and me as spam, considering how it's extremely clear that he didn't take the time to know what he was downvoting and angry facing.
-
Blindly following me around the forums downvoting/angry facing all of my posts, regardless of content/subject, isn't speech.
People are entitled to their feelings and can express them however they like, apart from violence or enticement thereof.
That's freedom of speech and expression.If he grows some balls and engages in actual speech, then we wouldn't be here.
Hear, hear!
We could view his recent targetting of you and me as spam, considering how it's extremely clear that he didn't take the time to know what he was downvoting and angry facing.
Really! And you're going to tell me that's not censorship!?
You're going to find any loophole to get him blocked, aren't you?
Notice you said: "we could view his recent targetting of you and me as spam". Not subjective at all.I personally do not care if he's downvoting me, my purpose here is not to be liked
-
I'm not trying to find a loophole to block or mute him. If that was my intent then I could have done it 3 years ago.
-
I have a theory about it.
When people's beliefs are based on simple emotions like fear and gratification.
Then when you question those beliefs they can only respond with emotion instead of thinking.
So you see childish behavior and there is no way to convince that person. -
Most leftist don't have the ability to discuss things, at least not in a rational way. I have zero respect for these people.
I love discussion and respect those that engage in it.
-
I have a theory about it.
When people's beliefs are based on simple emotions like fear and gratification.
Then when you question those beliefs they can only respond with emotion instead of thinking.
So you see childish behavior and there is no way to convince that person.So true!!
I have zero respect for these people.
You sound like Ana Kasparian when she ranted about women who voted for Trump!
Not a good look… -
Ana doesn't like non-leftist, no matter what.
I don't like leftists that refuse to have a proper discussion. Not quite the same.
If you (generic) can't defend your beliefs in a proper manner, then I have no respect for you.
If you forget about the violence part, then my little bitch stalker is just like the bike lock professor. Neither will have a discussion, they just react to shut up any descent.
-
Ana doesn't like non-leftist, no matter what.
Not sure.
What do you think she'd say about libertarians (or others) who voted for Hillary?I don't like leftists that refuse to have a proper discussion. Not quite the same.
If you (generic) can't defend your beliefs in a proper manner, then I have no respect for you.Who gets to define "proper manner"? You?
As long as violence or infringement on free speech aren't involved, I don't care. People can react however they like.If you forget about the violence part, then my little bitch stalker is just like the bike lock professor. Neither will have a discussion, they just react to shut up any descent.
They are not even remotely close!!!
-
Ana doesn't like non-leftist, no matter what.
Not sure.
What do you think she'd say about libertarians (or others) who voted for Hillary?That people have a right to "burn" their vote in effigy however they please?
I don't like leftists that refuse to have a proper discussion. Not quite the same.
If you (generic) can't defend your beliefs in a proper manner, then I have no respect for you.Who gets to define "proper manner"? You?
As long as violence or infringement on free speech aren't involved, I don't care. People can react however they like.
As a "Mod", yeah he has pretty much that power, however you will note he has not "banned" the individual in question. I think the point Raph is trying to make is that using the upvote/downvote system as a sort of cyber vandalism is not free speech. Much like the bands of thugs who over turn cars and set things on fire during a protest it contributes nothing to a conversation.If you forget about the violence part, then my little bitch stalker is just like the bike lock professor. Neither will have a discussion, they just react to shut up any descent.
They are not even remotely close!!!
When said party pretty much just relents, and instead of continuing a debate backed with fact and an opposing argument in favor of a blanket statement flatly denouncing his/her opponent without ever presenting a cohesive opposing argument then yes, it is the equivalent of saying shut up, the party in question has on more than one occasion done exactly that.
In short, the up vote/down vote function really never had a place in a debate forum as debate is not a popularity contest, rather a place to present ideals and promote open discussion. Whether one opinion rises or falls over another's opinion should be based on presentation and fact, not some little red thumb in the corner of the page. Furthermore, certainly not as a tool to stalk someone in an attempt to do some perceived damage to his/her reputation out of frustration that you bit off more than you could chew.
-
As a "Mod", yeah he has pretty much that power, however you will note he has not "banned" the individual in question. I think the point Raph is trying to make is that using the upvote/downvote system as a sort of cyber vandalism is not free speech. Much like the bands of thugs who over turn cars and set things on fire during a protest it contributes nothing to a conversation.
Cyber vandalism is another term for defacement. That's not what's happening here?
Did you mean abuse of the upvote/downvote system. If so are you sure you are able to contribute to the conversation when you're conflating that with the destruction of other people's property?
Just like when social justice warriors say freedom of speech means death for minorities because feelings… and offence... and stereotypes... and death. You fill in the gaps!When said party pretty much just relents, and instead of continuing a debate backed with fact and an opposing argument in favor of a blanket statement flatly denouncing his/her opponent without ever presenting a cohesive opposing argument then yes, it is the equivalent of saying shut up, the party in question has on more than one occasion done exactly that.
Freedom of speech and expression is also the freedom to express yourself the way you want (or not to express yourself). So if they want to downvote, so be it.
Personally I think it's cowardly and stupid but not everyone has the capacity to express themselves in a clear and coherent way.In short, the up vote/down vote function really never had a place in a debate forum as debate is not a popularity contest, rather a place to present ideals and promote open discussion. Whether one opinion rises or falls over another's opinion should be based on presentation and fact, not some little red thumb in the corner of the page. Furthermore, certainly not as a tool to stalk someone in an attempt to do some perceived damage to his/her reputation out of frustration that you bit off more than you could chew.
So what will it be? Banning the "stalker", the downvote part of the system or the system altogether?
Also allow me to remind you where you are: this is a gay porn torrent website where people can talk about men and their body parts, jokes or films. This is NOT the US Supreme Court's blog. So this is why the voting system is in place. -
As a "Mod", yeah he has pretty much that power, however you will note he has not "banned" the individual in question. I think the point Raph is trying to make is that using the upvote/downvote system as a sort of cyber vandalism is not free speech. Much like the bands of thugs who over turn cars and set things on fire during a protest it contributes nothing to a conversation.
Cyber vandalism is another term for defacement. That's not what's happening here?
Did you mean abuse of the upvote/downvote system. If so are you sure you are able to contribute to the conversation when you're conflating that with the destruction of other people's property?
Just like when social justice warriors say freedom of speech means death for minorities because feelings… and offence... and stereotypes... and death. You fill in the gaps!LOL Okay, perhaps flaming over turned cars was an extreme example, but to follow someone out of "Politics and Debate" all over every area of the forum down voting and mad facing everything they write is exactly that, a form of vandalism. You are attempting to deface that party via what ever means available.
When said party pretty much just relents, and instead of continuing a debate backed with fact and an opposing argument in favor of a blanket statement flatly denouncing his/her opponent without ever presenting a cohesive opposing argument then yes, it is the equivalent of saying shut up, the party in question has on more than one occasion done exactly that.
Freedom of speech and expression is also the freedom to express yourself the way you want (or not to express yourself). So if they want to downvote, so be it.
Personally I think it's cowardly and stupid but not everyone has the capacity to express themselves in a clear and coherent way.Again, you are entitled to your opinion. My opinion is that up/down votes really never should have been part of this particular area of the forum.
In short, the up vote/down vote function really never had a place in a debate forum as debate is not a popularity contest, rather a place to present ideals and promote open discussion. Whether one opinion rises or falls over another's opinion should be based on presentation and fact, not some little red thumb in the corner of the page. Furthermore, certainly not as a tool to stalk someone in an attempt to do some perceived damage to his/her reputation out of frustration that you bit off more than you could chew.
So what will it be? Banning the "stalker", the downvote part of the system or the system altogether?
Also allow me to remind you where you are: this is a gay porn torrent website where people can talk about men and their body parts, jokes or films. This is NOT the US Supreme Court's blog. So this is why the voting system is in place.LOL as you pointed out this is a porn sharing site, not the Supreme Court's blog, this SECTION of the forum is for members who wish to discuss/debate current affairs. Obviously Raph has chosen not to ban the stalker, rather it is pretty obvious at least to me he is trying to bait him into a battle of wits. If this were an old movie these two would wind up fucking for sure. ;D THAT is conjecture on my part of course. As for the banning - if it were going to happen I suspect it would already have been done - as a Mod he has that authority. The little red thumb? Also his call. Personally I won't miss it.
