Open Letter to Dr. Shades

The anything-goes forum for insults, board drama, and interpersonal conflicts. No moderation. Rated R to NC-17.
User avatar
Markk
Charlatan
Posts: 4745
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 10:04 pm

Re: Open Letter to Dr. Shades

Post by Markk »

I’ll ask the same question back to you ... what’s worse: hating a Catholic, or a Mormon, or an atheist, or whatever - if one of them is an abuser, or a murderer, or a cheat? Or just dishonest? Or not?

In context...as objects, it is the same. You seem to dis-remember that part of our discussion. Hate by definition is a passionate dislike of an object or thing.

Now back to the context of the discussion I was having with Kish when you entered the conversation...Kish was asserting the genocide against Jews in ww2, was worse than the current genocide against Christian's, so canpakes...what is worse? Is the hate the same...I believe it is. Your interjecting beets into the conversation was a straw-man diverting from the context. As an example you used nakedness, and I wrote "nakedness is nakedness."

Both vulgar porn, and a masters painting might show a naked woman, both are without clothes, and nakedness, is nakedness...even if one is decent and acceptable to most, while the other is vulgar and not acceptable to most. Or are you going to assert one is naked and the other is not...which one is not naked? And equally...is hating a Jew is worse that hating a Christian? Is either one acceptable to you?

In regards to Paul (Mormons/Mormonism) Doc (Trump)...their hatred (passionate dislike) for these objects is deep, very deep...search their threads and posts and you will find this as factual, and almost fanatical.
Don't take life so seriously in that " sooner or later we are just old men in funny clothes" "Tom 'T-Bone' Wolk"

User avatar
Markk
Charlatan
Posts: 4745
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 10:04 pm

Re: Open Letter to Dr. Shades

Post by Markk »

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:
I view you in context to your self-descriptions, the work you've told us about, and the things that you've posted here. I don't really have a mental picture of you, though. In fact, I don't think about you at all until you post.

- Doc


I simple search of my name, in posts by you shows otherwise. I didn't even post on this thread that you talked about me, you obviously have a formed opinion of me and others, and you did think of me when I did not post.

I just want to take a moment to point out Exiled's modus operandi, although I'm not sure Exiled fully understands what he's doing. This is important because, as EAllusion pointed out, Exiled seems to exact the highest of thresholds for proof when it comes to Trump or Conservative issues, but seems all too willing to accept the flimsiest of 'evidence' when it comes to Liberals (which he totes is down with, by the way). This also extends out to Markk, Ceeboo, and a few others to varying degrees. I should also note that some people are just too ____ dull to get outside their thick skulls and echo chambers to work an issue over in their minds. I digress...



viewtopic.php?p=1201569#p1201569
Don't take life so seriously in that " sooner or later we are just old men in funny clothes" "Tom 'T-Bone' Wolk"

Lemmie
God
Posts: 10360
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 1:25 pm

Re: Open Letter to Dr. Shades

Post by Lemmie »

Markk wrote:
I’ll ask the same question back to you ... what’s worse: hating a Catholic, or a Mormon, or an atheist, or whatever - if one of them is an abuser, or a murderer, or a cheat? Or just dishonest? Or not?


In context...as objects, it is the same. You seem to dis-remember that part of our discussion. Hate by definition is a passionate dislike of an object or thing.

Now back to the context of the discussion I was having with Kish when you entered the conversation...Kish was asserting the genocide against Jews in ww2, was worse than the current genocide against Christian's....

No, again you are misusing others’ words. Get Kishkumen’s argument right. he’s asked you to stop misstating his position at least 4 or 5 times, here’s one of the early ones:
Kishkumen, page 11, wrote:

I do say that it is irrelevant to our current problem on this board. You claim to be concerned about the situation on this board. Well, this board is predominantly comprised of ex-Mormons living in North America, followed by ex-Mormons living in other Western countries. These are not places where Christians are seriously threatened today.

So why should I consider the fairly mild and occasional criticism of Christianity on this board to be a pressing issue? Especially at a time when anti-Semitism is once again a serious problem in the West and the violence aimed at synagogues is noticeably on the rise. Anyone who is aware, knowledgable, and responsible is not going to see the two as equal in any way.

The simple fact of the matter is that you are raising irrelevant matters and engaging in whataboutism, and to the extent that this is true you make yourself a useful idiot to all the anti-Semites and white supremacists out there.

His last sentence sums it up exactly.

User avatar
Doctor CamNC4Me
God
Posts: 21283
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 5:02 am

Re: Open Letter to Dr. Shades

Post by Doctor CamNC4Me »

Professor Cameron's Steps to Confuse and Befuddle an Opponent through Dubiousness and Spuriousness

1) Demand an elaborate, time-consuming comparison between your position and theirs while offering up minimal responses that don't acknowledge points raised.

2) Insist that your opponent provide incontrovertible proof, and anything short of a recorded and signed confession won't be accepted as plausible. Recorded confessions will be assumed to be a deep fake and signed confessions are forgeries.

3) Dismiss their narrative as rubbish immediately (or hair fire or tin foil conspiracy, etc). Do not even read it. Once your opponent goes through the bother to research, gather, collate, compose and write their narrative your job is to discredit it. Make it obvious you tossed their labor-intensive narrative aside like garbage. This will have the effect of demoralizing the target poster. It will make them unwilling to expend the effort again, which is a net win. The sooner you can move the discussion into quips and cliches the better it is for your side.

4) As mentioned above it's extremely important to cherry pick their arguments. Just because they make a good point doesn't mean that you have to respond to it.

5) Quote them and then misrepresent what they said.

6) Attack the source because that's easier than addressing content. I like to call this one 'ad sourcenum'.

7) Confuse your opponent with questions, always questions. The questions need not be relevant. The goal is to get your opponent off their game, and preventing your opponent from making their point. Think Endless Recursion through Irrelevant Questions. Also, do not respond to their leading questions.

8) Just blurt out something, anything, instead of letting points go unchallenged. That, in of itself is a rebuttal and works like a charm. Posting for the sake of posting is as good as posting a well-thought point.

9) Deceive your opponent by identifying yourself as a member of their group, or as a moderate, centrist, independent, or act as though you used to be part of their group but then saw the error of your ways. <- The last one is the Born Again tactic. Or just stay on the low down. Works either way, no?

10) Insert our catch phrases into your posts. Stick with it and our talking points will become truth. If they debunk your talking point, ignore it, and move on because what's important is noise, not content.

11) There's this thing called 'sliding', and you see DCP do it a lot (and they also talk about it a lot on /pol/). LDSFAQs would do this quite a bit. If you want to hide something instead of addressing it, sliding a post is a great way to bury anything that you don't want to be seen. Simply create more posts above the conversation that you want to hide. The posts that you make will push the targeted posts further down, reducing the visibility of the objectionable material.

Any combination of these tactics are in use any given moment by bad actors. Anyway. I just want the audience to see what I see and note their ____ when they're doing it.

- Doc
In the face of madness, rationality has no power - Xiao Wang, US historiographer, 2287 AD.

Every record...falsified, every book rewritten...every statue...has been renamed or torn down, every date...altered...the process is continuing...minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Ideology is always right.

User avatar
Shulem
Son of Perdition
Posts: 11547
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:48 pm

Re: Open Letter to Dr. Shades

Post by Shulem »

Markk wrote:In regards to Paul (Mormons/Mormonism) Doc (Trump)...their hatred (passionate dislike) for these objects is deep, very deep...search their threads and posts and you will find this as factual, and almost fanatical.


Let me tell you something, Markk. The Mormons and many a rotten Christian have a passionate dislike towards homosexuality and often towards those who practice it. In the bible, the Jews had such a dislike towards homosexuality and those who practiced it that they executed them for expressing their love with another person! In our time, Mormons have worked hard to ensure gay marriage remain illegal. So, shove the bible and the Book of Mormon right up their ____ asses!

:evil:

How is that for hate? Don't you dare ____ tell me that biblical executions were not derived from hate. The ____ Jews in the bible had all kinds of fanatical practices and cult rituals that were totally sick by today's standards or by any standards from someone who lives by love, acceptance, and tolerance. Mormons today seek to hinder others from loving according to the dictates of their own conscience. Stupid ____ Mormons!

There.

User avatar
canpakes
God
Posts: 8502
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 12:54 am

Re: Open Letter to Dr. Shades

Post by canpakes »

Lemmie wrote:No, again you are misusing others’ words. Get Kishkumen’s argument right. he’s asked you to stop misstating his position at least 4 or 5 times, here’s one of the early ones:
Kishkumen, page 11, wrote:

I do say that it is irrelevant to our current problem on this board. You claim to be concerned about the situation on this board. Well, this board is predominantly comprised of ex-Mormons living in North America, followed by ex-Mormons living in other Western countries. These are not places where Christians are seriously threatened today.

So why should I consider the fairly mild and occasional criticism of Christianity on this board to be a pressing issue? Especially at a time when anti-Semitism is once again a serious problem in the West and the violence aimed at synagogues is noticeably on the rise. Anyone who is aware, knowledgable, and responsible is not going to see the two as equal in any way.

The simple fact of the matter is that you are raising irrelevant matters and engaging in whataboutism, and to the extent that this is true you make yourself a useful idiot to all the anti-Semites and white supremacists out there.

His last sentence sums it up exactly.

Not only that, but Markk makes an unwarranted assumption in thinking that the folks on this board would react any less strenuously to Smokey’s content and behavior were it aimed at Christians in the same way. I’d wager that the board’s reaction would be no different for all of the reasons already stated eloquently by Kish, Gad, yourself and others.

Lemmie
God
Posts: 10360
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 1:25 pm

Re: Open Letter to Dr. Shades

Post by Lemmie »

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:Professor Cameron's Steps to Confuse and Befuddle an Opponent through Dubiousness and Spuriousness

[SNIP]

Too funny. I just finished bringing over those steps from the link so graciously provided only to find your post. Apparently I’m not the only one who thinks they apply.

User avatar
Doctor CamNC4Me
God
Posts: 21283
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 5:02 am

Re: Open Letter to Dr. Shades

Post by Doctor CamNC4Me »

Lemmie wrote:
Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:Professor Cameron's Steps to Confuse and Befuddle an Opponent through Dubiousness and Spuriousness

[SNIP]

Too funny. I just finished bringing over those steps from the link so graciously provided only to find your post. Apparently I’m not the only one who thinks they apply.


Yeah, Markk likes to play this game of selective quoting that detracts from the OP's original point, and instead bolsters whatever skewed view he's pushing. I don't mind selectively quoting people as long as it's furthering the discussion point that's currently happening, but when you do what he does it's obvious he's playing a game.

In this case my ponts apply not only to him, but other disingenuous posters like MG, Smokey, subgenius, LDSFAQs, and Ajax to name a few off the top of my head.

- Doc
In the face of madness, rationality has no power - Xiao Wang, US historiographer, 2287 AD.

Every record...falsified, every book rewritten...every statue...has been renamed or torn down, every date...altered...the process is continuing...minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Ideology is always right.

Amore
God
Posts: 1094
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2014 10:27 am

Re: Open Letter to Dr. Shades

Post by Amore »

There are some nice people here, but some are simply mean - the epitome of bigoted: intolerant of anyone who thinks differently.

You wouldn’t like being shamed each time you see things differently than the herd. Why shame others?

User avatar
canpakes
God
Posts: 8502
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 12:54 am

Re: Open Letter to Dr. Shades

Post by canpakes »

Amore wrote:There are some nice people here, but some are simply mean - the epitome of bigoted: intolerant of anyone who thinks differently.

You wouldn’t like being shamed each time you see things differently than the herd. Why shame others?

And every so often, you run across someone who is intolerant of anyone seeking to explore a different position, and demonstrates that by knee-jerk labeling them as ‘bigoted’ for doing so, and calling them members of an imaginary ‘herd’. ; )

User avatar
Markk
Charlatan
Posts: 4745
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 10:04 pm

Re: Open Letter to Dr. Shades

Post by Markk »

Shulem wrote:
Let me tell you something, Markk. The Mormons and many a rotten Christian have a passionate dislike towards homosexuality and often towards those who practice it. In the bible, the Jews had such a dislike towards homosexuality and those who practiced it that they executed them for expressing their love with another person! In our time, Mormons have worked hard to ensure gay marriage remain illegal. So, shove the bible and the Book of Mormon right up their ____ asses!

:evil:

How is that for hate? Don't you dare ____ tell me that biblical executions were not derived from hate. The ____ Jews in the bible had all kinds of fanatical practices and cult rituals that were totally sick by today's standards or by any standards from someone who lives by love, acceptance, and tolerance. Mormons today seek to hinder others from loving according to the dictates of their own conscience. Stupid ____ Mormons!

There.


Paul,

I would never dare tell you that the Jews in the Bible did not have all kinds of fanatical practices based on today's standards. It is not like I have it all figured out or can explain a lot of it. Someday maybe we can discuss it in depth, maybe when we are both in outer darkness.

The way I look at it Paul, is that it is Mormonism that deserves the hate, not Mormons. I really believe that (LOL...except for my old SMP that told me I was going to hell, and went blabbing to my parents I was anti, and hurt their hearts, screw that guy).

I think we both, along with many here, understand how much of a cult it is...and for me that is all the more reason to try to love the Mormon out. But, that said, I needed the shock of the truth (the God Makers) to get my attention. And that that said said, I certainly cross that line all the time, from love to hateful talk.

I can honestly say that anyone that reads your more "deep loving" posts, have a good chance of getting that shock value. And honestly I could care less what you write, I would never hold it personally against you, if you cross a line I am not comfortable with, I simply turn the channel. I have more than enough issues in my closet, without worrying about whats in yours.

Take care
Don't take life so seriously in that " sooner or later we are just old men in funny clothes" "Tom 'T-Bone' Wolk"

User avatar
Res Ipsa
God
Posts: 10095
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 5:37 pm

Re: Open Letter to Dr. Shades

Post by Res Ipsa »

canpakes wrote:
Amore wrote:There are some nice people here, but some are simply mean - the epitome of bigoted: intolerant of anyone who thinks differently.

You wouldn’t like being shamed each time you see things differently than the herd. Why shame others?

And every so often, you run across someone who is intolerant of anyone seeking to explore a different position, and demonstrates that by knee-jerk labeling them as ‘bigoted’ for doing so, and calling them members of an imaginary ‘herd’. ; )


Ah yes, the ironically named poster who deliberately and maliciously spreads the kind of hatred that has gotten folks attacked, tortured and killed. Remember, the only bigotry is calling someone a bigot, and being one of the cool kids who call people who disagree with them cattle are definitely not following a herd.
​“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.”

― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 1951

Amore
God
Posts: 1094
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2014 10:27 am

Re: Open Letter to Dr. Shades

Post by Amore »

Res Ipsa wrote:
Amore wrote:There are some nice people here, but some are simply mean - the epitome of bigoted: intolerant of anyone who thinks differently.

You wouldn’t like being shamed each time you see things differently than the herd. Why shame others?

[Ganging up with Canpakes, to avoid logical discussion...]
Ah yes, the ironically named poster who deliberately and maliciously spreads the kind of hatred that has gotten folks attacked, tortured and killed. Remember, the only bigotry is calling someone a bigot, and being one of the cool kids who call people who disagree with them cattle are definitely not following a herd.


Image

User avatar
Res Ipsa
God
Posts: 10095
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 5:37 pm

Re: Open Letter to Dr. Shades

Post by Res Ipsa »

Oh noes, a Willy Wonka meme. I am utterly defeated by your logic-fu!!!!

If you’re going to continue playing your disingenuous victim of bigotry game, I’m going to keeping reminding folks of your actual bigotry.
​“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.”

― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 1951

User avatar
Dr. Shades
Founder & Visionary
Posts: 14130
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 3:07 pm

Re: Open Letter to Dr. Shades

Post by Dr. Shades »

Markk wrote:(LOL...except for my old SMP that told me I was going to hell, and went blabbing to my parents I was anti, and hurt their hearts, screw that guy).

"SMP" = "Stake Mission President??"
"Finally, for your rather strange idea that miracles are somehow linked to the amount of gay sexual gratification that is taking place would require that primitive Christianity was launched by gay sex, would it not?"

--Louis Midgley

User avatar
canpakes
God
Posts: 8502
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 12:54 am

Re: Open Letter to Dr. Shades

Post by canpakes »

Res Ipsa wrote:Oh noes, a Willy Wonka meme. I am utterly defeated by your logic-fu!!!!

And from the person complaining about ad hominem attacks after deciding that their argument should consist solely of calling others bigots. Lol.

User avatar
Doctor Steuss
God
Posts: 4592
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 12:57 pm

Re: Open Letter to Dr. Shades

Post by Doctor Steuss »

The mean bigoted herd sure do enjoy their ad hominem attacks. A move right out of the fake European Jew playbook, supported no doubt by homosexuals.
"Some people never go crazy. What truly horrible lives they must lead." ~Charles Bukowski

User avatar
Markk
Charlatan
Posts: 4745
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 10:04 pm

Re: Open Letter to Dr. Shades

Post by Markk »

Dr. Shades wrote:"SMP" = "Stake Mission President??"


Yes...he studied under Nibley at BYU and I thought he was going to have a heart attack when I criticized him on, if I remember correctly, his Book of Abraham interpretation of the facsimiles.
Don't take life so seriously in that " sooner or later we are just old men in funny clothes" "Tom 'T-Bone' Wolk"

User avatar
Markk
Charlatan
Posts: 4745
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 10:04 pm

Re: Open Letter to Dr. Shades

Post by Markk »

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:
Yeah, Markk likes to play this game of selective quoting that detracts from the OP's original point, and instead bolsters whatever skewed view he's pushing. I don't mind selectively quoting people as long as it's furthering the discussion point that's currently happening, but when you do what he does it's obvious he's playing a game.

In this case my ponts apply not only to him, but other disingenuous posters like MG, Smokey, subgenius, LDSFAQs, and Ajax to name a few off the top of my head.

- Doc


In other words anyone that disagrees with you and hold a different world view....LOL, classic doc. My OP was well with in context of the thread...the rest is nothing more that the evolution of how this board should, and maybe more importantly, how, the board treats negative and hateful posters and topics, and how it lends to our human nature.
Don't take life so seriously in that " sooner or later we are just old men in funny clothes" "Tom 'T-Bone' Wolk"

User avatar
Markk
Charlatan
Posts: 4745
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 10:04 pm

Re: Open Letter to Dr. Shades

Post by Markk »

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:Professor Cameron's Steps to Confuse and Befuddle an Opponent through Dubiousness and Spuriousness

1) Demand an elaborate, time-consuming comparison between your position and theirs while offering up minimal responses that don't acknowledge points raised.

2) Insist that your opponent provide incontrovertible proof, and anything short of a recorded and signed confession won't be accepted as plausible. Recorded confessions will be assumed to be a deep fake and signed confessions are forgeries.

3) Dismiss their narrative as rubbish immediately (or hair fire or tin foil conspiracy, etc). Do not even read it. Once your opponent goes through the bother to research, gather, collate, compose and write their narrative your job is to discredit it. Make it obvious you tossed their labor-intensive narrative aside like garbage. This will have the effect of demoralizing the target poster. It will make them unwilling to expend the effort again, which is a net win. The sooner you can move the discussion into quips and cliches the better it is for your side.

4) As mentioned above it's extremely important to cherry pick their arguments. Just because they make a good point doesn't mean that you have to respond to it.

5) Quote them and then misrepresent what they said.

6) Attack the source because that's easier than addressing content. I like to call this one 'ad sourcenum'.

7) Confuse your opponent with questions, always questions. The questions need not be relevant. The goal is to get your opponent off their game, and preventing your opponent from making their point. Think Endless Recursion through Irrelevant Questions. Also, do not respond to their leading questions.

8) Just blurt out something, anything, instead of letting points go unchallenged. That, in of itself is a rebuttal and works like a charm. Posting for the sake of posting is as good as posting a well-thought point.

9) Deceive your opponent by identifying yourself as a member of their group, or as a moderate, centrist, independent, or act as though you used to be part of their group but then saw the error of your ways. <- The last one is the Born Again tactic. Or just stay on the low down. Works either way, no?

10) Insert our catch phrases into your posts. Stick with it and our talking points will become truth. If they debunk your talking point, ignore it, and move on because what's important is noise, not content.

11) There's this thing called 'sliding', and you see DCP do it a lot (and they also talk about it a lot on /pol/). LDSFAQs would do this quite a bit. If you want to hide something instead of addressing it, sliding a post is a great way to bury anything that you don't want to be seen. Simply create more posts above the conversation that you want to hide. The posts that you make will push the targeted posts further down, reducing the visibility of the objectionable material.

Any combination of these tactics are in use any given moment by bad actors. Anyway. I just want the audience to see what I see and note their ____ when they're doing it.

- Doc


12) Make dumb lists why people that disagree with you, or share a different opinion, ideology, faith, or world view are wrong. And then write post after post telling people that might agree with you, why the person that disagreed with you are wrong, while totally ignoring the person that you are whining about.
Don't take life so seriously in that " sooner or later we are just old men in funny clothes" "Tom 'T-Bone' Wolk"

User avatar
Doctor CamNC4Me
God
Posts: 21283
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 5:02 am

Re: Open Letter to Dr. Shades

Post by Doctor CamNC4Me »

When Markk's and Smokey's and Ajax's hate turns on itself:

http://boards.4chan.org/pol/thread/2403 ... houldnt-be

- Doc
In the face of madness, rationality has no power - Xiao Wang, US historiographer, 2287 AD.

Every record...falsified, every book rewritten...every statue...has been renamed or torn down, every date...altered...the process is continuing...minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Ideology is always right.

Post Reply