Deadly internet bullying, OR ways in which the FF is like police brutality

[Naru]

Originally Posted by mickthinks

I think it has been fairly well established that, in context, the post in question was not abusive.
You obviously haven't been paying attention to the 'tone' of my posts on the issue, babe!

I may be the only one who doesn't believe in gravity, but that means it's not well established!

[LadyShea]

I didn't say "Mick sucks" nor do I think you suck. I think you frequently misinterpret or completely miss tone, intent, and mood and I think that your perception of bullying and mob behavior is directly related.

[mickthinks]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

Then you admit you isolated it from the context, which led you to misinterpret and misrepresent it.

No, though I did miss the passage in god3's post that Chuck was parroting, and I am grateful to Adam for pointing it out. It makes a difference to the way I read it, but it doesn't change the abuse of "shitheads like godfry" into non-abuse.

[beyelzu]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

I didn't say "Mick sucks" nor do I think you suck. I think you frequently misinterpret or completely miss tone, intent, and mood and I think that your perception of bullying and mob behavior is directly related.

but just between us, you do think he sucks right?

[seebs]

Originally Posted by mickthinks

I think it has been fairly well established that, in context, the post in question was not abusive.
You obviously haven't been paying attention to the 'tone' of my posts on the issue, babe!

No, we just think you're wrong. It's absolutely clear, given the post it was a response to, that the post in question was not abusive.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by mickthinks

I think it has been fairly well established that, in context, the post in question was not abusive.
You obviously haven't been paying attention to the 'tone' of my posts on the issue, babe!

I can't tell if that's sarcasm or not. If anything, I'd be failing to pay attention to the content of your posts but, no, I'm aware that you persist in claiming that the post in question was abusive. Everyone else who has commented finds that the context makes a difference, though, so leaving it out plainly does change the meaning for your readers. I'm not as concerned about you quoting it out of context as I am about you interpreting it out of context. I don't think you quoted it that way maliciously, I think you quoted it that way because that's how you interpreted it.

If you want to put the thread back on track then you'll perhaps have a word with seebs and LS and persuade them this "Mick sucks" mullarky is a waste of time?[/SIZE]

I don't see anyone (particularly not the two individuals you named) claiming that you suck.

[mickthinks]

I don't see anyone (particularly not the two individuals you named) claiming that you suck.

It's meant to be a short-hand for a familiar style of derailment, not a literal description of the words used. Are you deny it on this technicality? That doesn't help get us back on track.

Originally Posted by seebs

Again, missing tone.

Originally Posted by LadyShea

Why did you remove it from the context in the first place? That is a really, really odd thing to do.

Originally Posted by seebs

No, you're just autistic.

Originally Posted by LadyShea

... you isolated it from the context, which led you to misinterpret and misrepresent it.

Mick

[beyelzu]

Originally Posted by Adam

I can't tell if that's sarcasm or not. If anything, I'd be failing to pay attention to the content of your posts but, no, I'm aware that you persist in claiming that the post in question was abusive. Everyone else who has commented finds that the context makes a difference, though, so leaving it out plainly does change the meaning for your readers. I'm not as concerned about you quoting it out of context as I am about you interpreting it out of context. I don't think you quoted it that way maliciously, I think you quoted it that way because that's how you interpreted it.

I don't see anyone (particularly not the two individuals you named) claiming that you suck.

ahem

[erimir]

mick, it's a bit rich for you to be complaining about this thread being derailed when *I* am the one who started the thread and you have consistently refused to address the original topic of my thread. Your first post in this thread was off-topic. When will you apologize for derailing the thread?

So, this thread has never been on-topic after the first couple posts, so it really makes no difference whether it's derailed yet again or not, but even so, I'll pretend like it was on-topic before and it's just been derailed:

Originally Posted by mickthinks

... I believe this particular derail began when you decided that your misunderstanding of the "shitheads like godfry" post was less important than seebs and I not marching in lockstep on the precise nature of that misunderstanding.
The nature of my 'misunderstanding' is the derail. If you want to put the thread back on track then you'll perhaps have a word with seebs and LS and persuade them this "Mick sucks" mullarky is a waste of time?

How can we not get on a derail about how you've misunderstood Chuck's post?

You are making a claim about Chuck, in support of this claim, you quote this post. Everyone else thinks that you have severely misinterpreted this post.

It has been explained why you misinterpreted the post. You refuse to admit you were wrong.

So, in order to get the thread back on track, what should we do? "Admit" that you're right, when we honestly don't think you are? This would just lead to another derail as you discuss how our "dishonest capitulation" is yet another way to continue a disagreement. Continuing the discussion of chuck's post, which you seem to be set in your opinion on, will naturally lead to a discussion of why it is that you have misinterpreted his post.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by mickthinks

I don't see anyone (particularly not the two individuals you named) claiming that you suck.

It's meant to be a short-hand for a familiar style of derailment, not a literal description of the words used. Are you deny it on this technicality? That doesn't help get us back on track.

Using "mick sucks" as shorthand implies that you think there's some sort of personal attack on you involved. I don't see that, I just see people (ok, except for bey) pointing out a misunderstanding and some speculation as to why that misunderstanding occurred.

Seriously, what do you think an appropriate, non-derailing response would be to a situation where you interpret a post one way and just about everyone else interprets it differently?

[Crumb]

Originally Posted by mickthinks

Have you ever admitted you were wrong about anything? ever?

Yes, of course. That wasn't a very good explanation though, Crumb—am I going to get one?

It will have to remain an unresolved issue.

[beyelzu]

thank you, adam, I was finding your exclusion to me emotionally harmful and bullying, I am glad that you can finally admit that you were wrong to bully and injure me so maliciously, hopefully you can continue to be honest about your dishonest bullying in the future.

[Adam]

Stfu and give me your lunch money. <-- that's some rank abuse for you

[seebs]

Mick, I'm not saying you suck -- that's a statement of your value as a person, and I'm not making it.

I'm saying your skill at interpreting communication sucks. Epically. I'm saying that you consistently misunderstand text that is completely, totally, clear to literally 99% or so of the human population. (Autism is under 1% of the population.)

Here's the thing. We have a bunch of people who are having a really hard time even understanding why you are misreading this stuff. We have an autistic guy who's studied the field and practiced a lot who can explain that it's a misreading, show you how the analysis works, and agrees that there is a possible ambiguity.

Seriously, see an autism specialist. Or, at the very least, read up on how these skills work, because you would be much more effective at both reading and writing if you understood these rules and could emulate the assumptions ordinary people make.

In communication, all that matters is whether or not you're communicating successfully. Mick, you're not. You're not interpreting what other people say the way they mean it, and you're not doing a great job of making your own views clear. You're failing to do these things in a characteristic way, and you're still doing it even after having it explained.

That makes it largely pointless to try to engage. It's too hard to write in a way that you'll understand correctly, and it removes a lot of the expressive power of normal human language usage. You live in a world full of people who use sarcasm, irony, hyperbole, and other rhetorical devices to communicate. Your options are to learn to understand these communication techniques, or spend a ton of time angry at people over your misunderstandings of things they said. Your choice.

[ChuckF]

Originally Posted by beyelzu

thank you, adam, I was finding your exclusion to me emotionally harmful and bullying, I am glad that you can finally admit that you were wrong to bully and injure me so maliciously, hopefully you can continue to be honest about your dishonest bullying in the future.

bey, while we are clearing the air, I think I need to apologize for my rank abuse of you and your sweet ass. It's true that it is sweeter than mine, and yes, I hate you for that, but it doesn't excuse my malicious emotional injury.

[xyza]

Okay so I just clicked on this thread for the first time and I haven't read all of it at all (I've read similar here). Of course it took me to the first post ... The very first sentence caused me much upset ...

Originally Posted by erimir

[...] " mob" engages in "bullying" like that of the police officer in London.

Our British police are no worse than most other countries including the US ... I seem to remember a case where a stag and his party were blown to kingdom come when they left a night club in the US. There was a big outcry over the extreme force that was used and the amount of bullets fired.

[godfry n. glad]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

I posted to godfry: "As you and I have had several times"
godfry and I have had, well, fights about some topics over the years. I think I called him a dick and I think he said I was promoting suicide or something. No mob, just me and godfry throwin' down.

Nah...It was about you chucking your litter/trash out the window into the desert..."because there was nothin' there, anyway," is how I remember it. I generally get dissed for 'promoting suicide' myself. But then, I don't remember every damned thing I said, 'back in the day'.

And, yeah, there was no adolescent, high-school clique kind of petty bickering and picking. It was straight up. I think we both walked away from it mad and never picked it up again. I still think that LS is one of the many superlative folks here at FF. Probably in part because she stood up for herself. I know I can be wrong, bullheaded, and sometimes even an asshole. Even then, sometimes I believe I'm doing it for a worthy cause. I have those kinds of delusions.

Originally Posted by LS

I disagree. It seemed to me to be an in-kind response to godfry's completely over the top exhortation to accost cell phone users on the streets. Again, no mob, just Chuck and godfry.

Funny....that 'accosting cell phone users' is what you call law enforcement for safety. But, yeah. It was over the top. It usually is.

The Insane Clown Posse we can do without though. Aside from you, Leesifer, Qingdai, seebs, and chunks, this is a heavily graybar thread for me. As I noted earlier, if you prod ChuckF, you get the rest. It must be a fun snark fest...I don't need to relive junior high school again. And Crumbs...the guy has a problem. Cut him some slack or put him on ignore, huh?

[ChuckF]

Originally Posted by godfry n. glad

I know I can be wrong, bullheaded, and sometimes even an asshole. Even then, sometimes I believe I'm doing it for a worthy cause. I have those kinds of delusions.

And then some. When I mock you, I believe I'm doing it for a worthy cause.

Funny....that 'accosting cell phone users' is what you call law enforcement for safety.

Lie.

But, yeah. It was over the top. It usually is.

True.

I don't need to relive junior high school again.

Dude I can imagine.

Of course you are "ignoring" this

[Adam]

Originally Posted by xyza

Okay so I just clicked on this thread for the first time and I haven't read all of it at all (I've read similar here). Of course it took me to the first post ... The very first sentence caused me much upset ...

Our British police are no worse than most other countries including the US ... I seem to remember a case where a stag and his party were blown to kingdom come when they left a night club in the US. There was a big outcry over the extreme force that was used and the amount of bullets fired.

That was a specific reference to this thread, not a general commentary on the London po-po.

[erimir]

I guess I'm on godfry's list. I dared to question chiropractic and cell phone-velocity taxes, therefore I am an insane clown

I'm capable of leaving that stuff in their threads, and I've been able to get along with godfry in other threads. Altho I'm pretty sure I remember him saying some pretty offensive things about me being gay while he was angry, which is probably a "better" grounds for putting him on ignore than anything I've done to him.

[ChuckF]

No you're not. You started the thread and he's replying to it. But he'll probably insist that you really are.

I'm capable of leaving that stuff in their threads, and I've been able to get along with godfry in other threads. Altho I'm pretty sure I remember him saying some pretty offensive things about me being gay while he was angry, which is probably a "better" grounds for putting him on ignore than anything I've done to him.

Too bad. You have sinned and not quaked in agreement at the righteous godfryrage. Now he's going to ignore you!

Which really just means you keep mocking him and he doesn't fight back.

[Adam]

Insane Clowns

[xyza]

Adam you see the giggle at the end ???

[Adam]

No, I have the last line of your posts on ignore because of your insane clowning.

[BracesForImpact]

I've been reading this thread on and off for a bit now, and I have to say, I'm shocked. Shocked I say. You mean all of you aren't best friends? WTF?

If it's any consolation, you can go through quite a few threads as an outside reader (kinda of what I consider myself, I read a lot more than I post) and not see this animosity.

Anyway, just throwing out some observations. I think thus far I've been lucky not to be on someone's shit list. I kinda feel like the crowd at a Jerry Springer show, except there's no chairs or food flying around.

show spoiler

YET