• Egon [they/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    You are already engaged in a discussion, which you engaged by posting and then responding to posts. Your responses are then show. To be in bad faith, since you are not willing to interact with the argumens other users present in good faith. This is typical of you libs, but it is an unfortunate side effect that good and educating discussion gets drowned out by you uneducated idiots that think a link to Wikipedia means anything… Good education is drowned out by you smuglords that fail to realise civility is a two-way street. These snide comments you make are then further expounded by other snide idiots, which further muddies the waters and ruins discussion, it doesn’t seem like an effective strategy to me, because you get called out on it, that is what you all want to do and sadly the only thing that can be done in response is to not take you seriously until you either get too hurt that your idiotic comments results in similarly asinine responses or you get too hurt from the people calling you on your bullshit and you defederate PIGPOOPBALLS

    • Joe
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      And now you turn to name calling and making further assumptions about me? Sigh.

      There are threads that end with good comments or arguments, either because they are solid (eg. class struggle is never ending) or funny. They don’t need me to pat them on the head.

      • Egon [they/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I have yet to call you a name or make an assumption - I’ve pointed out the actions you’ve taken. “You smuglords” clearly being in the plural. Please work on your reading comprehension.
        If you think having your behaviour pointed out to you is “name calling” consider wether you’re just a piece of shit.
        Also again you refuse to engage with argument presented to you. Since you refuse good faith discussion, why do you think you deserve anything other than ridicule? You’re clearly a moron

        • Joe
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          “you libs”, “you smuglords”… do you really think that pluralizing an assumption or insult makes it less of one? This could be some weird use of the English language that I’m not familiar with, but it reads the same to me, and comes across as rude and dismissive. I have engaged extensively with you here and elsewhere … in good faith. I have not resorted to insults. I’ve left open the possibility for simple misunderstandings, giving you the possibility to explain. I don’t think you are arguing in bad faith, but I suspect that you have reached some limit and are falling back to bad habits.

          An observation of mine: You and some other hexbears seem to throw around the term “libs” as an insult whenever someone doesn’t agree with you, and often prematurely. To me, this comes across as a cop-out, and as a way of stroking your own egos without adding value.

          I also think that you have developed your own “common knowledge” in relative isolation, and often have trouble explaining/justifying it outside of the hexbear community. Instead, a lot seems meme-ified and is repeated without thought.

          I will continue to encourage people to explain or argue their case. I will also continue trying to be open and inclusive, and advocating for dialogue.

          • Egon [they/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Tell you what, you’ve come across as snide, dismissive smug and completely uninterested in an actual discussion, instead maintaining the superiorty of your own belief, and purely working towards convincing me on what is right.
            But I’ve been in this thread quite a bit, I’m a bit on hair trigger, so I’m gonna give you the benefit of the doubt and come back to you in a little while.
            You’re right, I called you a name last time and I’m sorry. That completely invalidates all the arguments put forth.

            You and some other hexbears seem to throw around the term “libs” as an insult whenever someone doesn’t agree with you, and often prematurely.

            Rehashing the same tired debunked argument time and again does get tiring. “Reverting” to calling you a lib is a way of highlighting the many thought-terminating cliches being spit out as a result of being uncritically enmenshed in propaganda.

            I also think that you have developed your own “common knowledge” in relative isolation, and often have trouble explaining/justifying it outside of the hexbear community.

            My experience is quite the reverse. Every time I interact with one of your opinions you revert to the same tired arguments using the same tired long-debunked “facts” - When you actually use facts. Most of the time you refuse to engage with the arguments put forth in the discussion you’re having. Instead you choose condescenstion. You do this because you believe yourself to be correct and me to be misinformed - I simply haven’t heard of the holodomor or whatever. I was once like you, but then I started investigating the things I thought I knew about. Consider wether you might be misinformed about things you consider to be true. Consider why you are misinformed on these things. Consider who misinformed you. Consider what you can do to work against this misinformation. Consider why you react as you do with people whose beliefs stride against your perception of reality. Consider why those people have those beliefs despite us all learning those simple things you hold to be true.

            My experience of hexbear is that of a vibrant community sharing knowledge and critiquing each other when that knowledge is lacking or wrong. This leads to a community that shows humility towards learning new things, as well as staying critical towards that which it believes to “know”. You do not experience this humility because you come in as an outsider expecting your tired long-since-debunked beliefs to somehow have any relevance or novelty. They are not new, they are not insightful and they have been shown time and again to be wrong. Which is fine - we’re all wrong. The “bad habit” you experience is people being sick of arguing with obviously wrong libs that refuse to engage with new knowledge.
            Asking questions is good, but posturing as if you are the purveyor of divine knowledge to be shared (and that knowledge being wrong) leads to you meeting the attitude you’ve met

            I will continue to encourage people to explain or argue their case. I will also continue trying to be open and inclusive, and advocating for dialogue.

            I am glad to hear that that is what you think you are doing. I would encourage you to investigate how you interact with those you disagree with, and reconsider how you are creating dialogue

          • Egon [they/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Allright having looked at it again:

            You come into this with an ahistorical “point” about famines. There is no humility or invitation to an open dialogue, you are clearly being condescending and smug.
            Your “point” gets argued by me in the way that I point out that famines were eliminated. Instead of engaging with this argument, you once again choose condescention talking vaguely about “if the dead could argue their case” and then vague speak of looking at past tragedies. I engage with this point and agree, which leads me to reiterate my argument - One famine once is better than constant famines. Once again you choose smugness and condescention instead of engaging with the argument. You the try to change the discussion to one of food aid? Instead of relating to the one that was present. This is so far typical bad-faith behaviour. You once again return to the question of starvation.

            I then once again point out how historically famine had been an issue, and it was eliminated. I then point out how famine and starvation is still an issue in capitalist countries. You do not engage with this point, instead handwaving “there are a lot of problems” and you try to downplay the achievement by writing a lie (famine has been solved) which also still doesn’t answer any of the questions I’ve asked. So far you’re still being condescending, I’ve yet to call you a name.
            I respond to every one of your arguments and point out how you are going against historical consensus on what happened in the soviet union wrt the famine in the soviet union. I refrained from pointing out how you’ve engaged in “double genocide theory” which was pushed by nazis to downplay the holocaust. I am however tired of your condescention and your tired arguments, so I am curt and I finish off with a rude picture.
            You have yet to respond to this post, yet you continue the same argument elsewhere with both me and other users. It is clear you are not interested in a good-faith discussion. If you were you would have answered my questions, related to the arguments and asked questions where you were unsure. You didn’t.

            Elsewhere someone points out your absurdity and idiocy by responding your condescending ahistorical “famine” comment with a “gottem”. You ask if that’s a joke - thereby implying you think your comment in any way deserved to be validated, despite the fact that we’ve now all seen that it was right to disregard you and your opinions.
            I point this out and I refer to your type of person with a derisive name - Indirectly calling you a name. This then becomes the crux of your new argument, instead of - once again - actually engaging in the arguments put forth in the discussion you’re having. It is clear you are not willing to engage in an exchange of knowledge of opinions, instead looking for quick and easy ways to post smug and condescending comments.
            Now we are here, you will have learned nothing. You will at best engage with the name calling or - once again - me making “assumptions” about you. Assumptions that have so far been proven true.

            With this behaviour you’ve engaged in, why do you think you deserve anything other than ridicule?