What does targeted, sweep-evading, story vandalism look like?

[OddLove]

again, same for you, please start a flame thread and I will be happy to engage on and off when I have time. looks like, finally, an actual conversation has started here, so I will not respond further to ad hominem. However, you are not blocked. just do it elsewhere. I positively love flame wars and such. hopefully see you there.

If you can't handle push back, my suggest is preemptively protecting yourself by not engaging with people.

You cosplay as the 'reasonable' one, but you crumble and alarm the 'Ad Hominem' whenever you need to dodge a direct point that calls you out here.

It's unironicallu smug child behavior. You need thicker skin.

EDIT: Another option of course is just admit you were intentionally playing stupid when you claimed ignorance of sweeps so that you could dodge a difficult point you wanted to ignore.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

I believe it's happening to several people in this thread now. My entire catalog got bombed within a day after disagreeing with people here. The OP and others here have warned "It will happen to you too" to everyone who questioned or disagreed with the OP.

This is a great opportunity to see if the sweeps will handle it.

It appears that the "it will happen to you" was a threat rather than a warning.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

heh. ok, if you want to, please start a flame thread and let me know. we can exchange yo mamas at each other like its September, 1993. otherwise, know that I've not blocked you. as a free speech absolutist, I never block anyone. but I think responding to flame bait in other people's threads is wrong. I should control myself better than I have in here so far.

you can also DM me, of course, but its definitely more fun in public, I get it.

So, I point out obvious inconsistencies in your argument and you respond with personal attacks?

You certainly are the moderate voice of reason you want us to think you are...

 

[Kelliezgirl]

This is a helpful resource:

https://www.highconflictinstitute.com/who-are-high-conflict-people/

Great article, it's your behavior to a T.
Hopefully that gives you a path to improve.

 

[OddLove]

It appears that the "it will happen to you" was a threat rather than a warning.

The silver lining for me is, this isn't Amazon and I'm not trying to sell a product. Like if my rent depended on this though, I wouldn't be caught dead in the forums lol

 

[metropolinational]

You cosplay as the 'reasonable' one

the moderate voice of reason you want us to think you are

ok fine. I will take the bait just one more time. I have never claimed to be moderate or reasonable. if I ever have, it's only as a form of extreme satire. or, I was claiming to be the world's most moderate and reasonable person, as a form of obviously ridiculous hyperbole.

I'm the least reasonable and moderate person here. I take great pride in that. here is a small sample of stuff I believe that will give you a sense of how crazy I am, so that you can please never call me moderate or reasonable again. you guys cut deep with those insults.

me: I would have voted for trump if he had promised to make Ed Snowden director of the NSA and Ross Ulbricht director of the DEA.
me: I believe life starts at conception. I'm also pro-abortion rights. Thus, I believe in the mother's right to murder her babies.
me: Terrorist is what the big army calls the little army.
me: Conspiracy theory is what the corporate media calls the citizen media.
me: Property is theft. Intellectual property is intellectual theft.
me: No taxation without representation. No representation without taxation. One dollar, one vote (on the log10 scale).

now, after you climb back on your chair, in awe of just how crazy I am, I will collect your apologies...

 

[OddLove]

ok fine. I will take the bait just one more time. I have never claimed to be moderate or reasonable. if I ever have, it's only as a form of extreme satire. or, I was claiming to be the world's most moderate and reasonable person, as a form of obviously ridiculous hyperbole.

I'm the least reasonable and moderate person here. I take great pride in that. here is a small sample of stuff I believe that will give you a sense of how crazy I am, so that you can please never call me moderate or reasonable again. you guys cut deep with those insults.

me: I would have voted for trump if he had promised to make Ed Snowden director of the NSA and Ross Ulbricht director of the DEA.
me: I believe life starts at conception. I'm also pro-abortion rights. Thus, I believe in the mother's right to murder her babies.
me: Terrorist is what the big army calls the little army.
me: Conspiracy theory is what the corporate media calls the citizen media.
me: Property is theft. Intellectual property is intellectual theft.
me: No taxation without representation. No representation without taxation. One dollar, one vote.

now, after you climb back on your chair, in awe of just how crazy I am, I will collect your apologies...

I believe in space whales. I know they're out there eating planets. They swim through the fourth dimension (space water) and they only breach when they're hungry.

 

[Comshaw]

that's not how data works. she's presented data. 14 people voted 1s and 2s on her stories today. that's data.

it does not matter if 99% of scientists believe in climate change or if 99% believe there is no climate change. the climate is either changing or its not. facts are not a democracy.

14 people voted on her story. The question that should be asked is: are they valid votes? Which begs the question: What is a valid vote?
Per this system, everyone has one vote to cast. One and one only. A person casting more than one makes it invalid.

We only have EM's word that the 14 votes in the configuration presented exist. I'll accept that. Did they come from individual people? If so, no matter what they voted, the votes are valid. It doesn't matter if they voted because they dislike EM. It doesn't matter if they stubbed their toe on the way to the computer and voted a 1 because they were pissed about it. They expressed themselves by voting as they wanted to. You insisted in another post that you are, "...a free speech absolutist." If so you must support allowing people to vote how they want to as an expression of their free speech rights. To put it plainly, no matter why they voted a 1 or 2 if it came from a single person it IS a valid vote and is NOT a troll vote.

So what it an invalid troll vote? The only votes that fit that category are multiple votes from the same person (which as far as I know get caught by the sweeps) or votes, single or multiple, by software such as AI. EM has insisted that both are true, that both are being done and the perps have found some mysterious way to avoid the sweeps. She has also claimed she can duplicate the performance and reverse it to prove it can be done, yet won't. Draw whatever conclusions you will from that. The problem is the data she presented doesn't show anything of the kind. It's one possibility, but by no means the only explanation. A false conclusion on her part.

You keep arguing the same point over and over, that most in this thread are ATTACKING EM because she is concerned about vote trolling and how it's affecting *eveyone*. If you have read every post in this thread, I fail to see how you came to that conclusion. Refusing to agree with a false premise and attacking a person are two distinctly different things. She has been attacked by a few, but only as a reflex counter punch for her own behavior.

And yes I am still tired of this thread, tired of watching things being repeated over and over even after being shown to be false. But like a moth to a flame I can't seem to let ignorant or patently false statements go unchallenged.


Comshaw

 

[Comshaw]

ok fine. I will take the bait just one more time. I have never claimed to be moderate or reasonable. if I ever have, it's only as a form of extreme satire. or, I was claiming to be the world's most moderate and reasonable person, as a form of obviously ridiculous hyperbole.

I'm the least reasonable and moderate person here. I take great pride in that. here is a small sample of stuff I believe that will give you a sense of how crazy I am, so that you can please never call me moderate or reasonable again. you guys cut deep with those insults.

me: I would have voted for trump if he had promised to make Ed Snowden director of the NSA and Ross Ulbricht director of the DEA.
me: I believe life starts at conception. I'm also pro-abortion rights. Thus, I believe in the mother's right to murder her babies.
me: Terrorist is what the big army calls the little army.
me: Conspiracy theory is what the corporate media calls the citizen media.
me: Property is theft. Intellectual property is intellectual theft.
me: No taxation without representation. No representation without taxation. One dollar, one vote (on the log10 scale).

now, after you climb back on your chair, in awe of just how crazy I am, I will collect your apologies...

Please,



Comshaw

 

[MelissaBaby]

ok fine. I will take the bait just one more time. I have never claimed to be moderate or reasonable. if I ever have, it's only as a form of extreme satire. or, I was claiming to be the world's most moderate and reasonable person, as a form of obviously ridiculous hyperbole.

I'm the least reasonable and moderate person here. I take great pride in that. here is a small sample of stuff I believe that will give you a sense of how crazy I am, so that you can please never call me moderate or reasonable again. you guys cut deep with those insults.

me: I would have voted for trump if he had promised to make Ed Snowden director of the NSA and Ross Ulbricht director of the DEA.
me: I believe life starts at conception. I'm also pro-abortion rights. Thus, I believe in the mother's right to murder her babies.
me: Terrorist is what the big army calls the little army.
me: Conspiracy theory is what the corporate media calls the citizen media.
me: Property is theft. Intellectual property is intellectual theft.
me: No taxation without representation. No representation without taxation. One dollar, one vote (on the log10 scale).

now, after you climb back on your chair, in awe of just how crazy I am, I will collect your apologies...

You’re not crazy, just an edgelord.

 

[metropolinational]

You insisted in another post that you are, "...a free speech absolutist." If so you must support allowing people to vote how they want to as an expression of their free speech rights. To put it plainly, no matter why they voted a 1 or 2 if it came from a single person it IS a valid vote and is NOT a troll vote.

yes, that's what I believe.

I am almost certain, though, @EmilyMiller is not remotely a free speech absolutist.

if this conversation was more reasonable and people were not engaging in ad hominem, deflection and weird logical fallacies, I would probably be arguing AGAINST her here, or not participating at all. Instead, I'm defending her because people are being so strangely aggressive and she's just trying to address a site issue using data.

 

[metropolinational]

You’re not crazy, just an edgelord.

just more ad hominem. again, please join the other three and start a flame war thread if you think it'd be fun. I won't derail things here further.

I will also add that I admire the way you have engaged with this discussion. the last bit aside, I wish more people here were like you. plus, I follow you because your writing is amazing!

 

[Kelliezgirl]

yes, that's what I believe.

I am almost certain, though, @EmilyMiller is not remotely a free speech absolutist.

if this conversation was more reasonable and people were not engaging in ad hominem, deflection and weird logical fallacies, I would probably be arguing AGAINST her here, or not participating at all. Instead, I'm defending her because people are being so strangely aggressive and she's just trying to address a site issue using data.

How precisely is repeatedly complaining about the same thing, and posting unverifiable numbers "trying to address the issue"?

Neither you nor her have proposed any actual solutions to the "problem". And as a practical matter, there isn't anything any of us can do about this "problem".

You seem to think we should all join arm in arm with OP and we can spit into the wind I'm unison.

 

[Comshaw]

yes, that's what I believe.

I am almost certain, though, @EmilyMiller is not remotely a free speech absolutist.

if this conversation was more reasonable and people were not engaging in ad hominem, deflection and weird logical fallacies, I would probably be arguing AGAINST her here, or not participating at all. Instead, I'm defending her because people are being so strangely aggressive and she's just trying to address a site issue using data.

Please cite and quote some examples of your accusations. If you don't care to, I'll assume that those accusations have no substance. I've already pointed out with examples who threw the first insult and can show other examples of that by the same individual later in the thread. She isn't "just trying to address a site issue using data". As I have consistently pointed out, she insists that only one conclusion can be drawn from that data when in reality there are multiple possibilities and all are equally possible.

Comshaw

 

[MelissaBaby]

just more ad hominem. again, please join the other three and start a flame war thread if you think it'd be fun. I won't derail things here further.

I will also add that I admire the way you have engaged with this discussion. the last bit aside, I wish more people here were like you. plus, I follow you because your writing is amazing!

Thank you for that.Around here, I am practically the fucking Buddha, so I will withdraw the edgelord comment and concede that you are crazy.

 

[Comshaw]

How precisely is repeatedly complaining about the same thing, and posting unverifiable numbers "trying to address the issue"?

Neither you nor her have proposed any actual solutions to the "problem". And as a practical matter, there isn't anything any of us can do about this "problem".

You seem to think we should all join arm in arm with OP and we can spit into the wind I'm unison.

"You don''t tug on Superman's cape,
I don't spit into the wind,
you don't mess around with the ol' Lone Ranger
and you don't mess around with THE FUCKING SITE, 'CAUSE WE AIN'T GOT NO POWER TO!!!"

COMSHAW

 

[metropolinational]

Neither you nor her have proposed any actual solutions to the "problem".

Emily has proposed a number of solutions. most recently she proposed more responsiveness from the site other than this issue.

My concerns are not Emily's concerns, so my solution is not a solution to her problem, but rather to my problems. I have posted the solution to my problem at least three times in this very thread.

 

[EmilyMiller]

I am almost certain, though, @EmilyMiller is not remotely a free speech absolutist.

No I’m not. Freedom of speech is a great gift and a great power, but… [insert Spider-man quote here]

 

[Kelliezgirl]

Emily has proposed a number of solutions. most recently she proposed more responsiveness from the site other than this issue.

My concerns are not Emily's concerns, so my solution is not a solution to her problem, but rather to my problems. I have posted the solution to my problem at least three times in this very thread.

That's not a solution to the issues with the voting system.
So, where, in this thread, has OP actually posted a solution?

 

[metropolinational]

That's not a solution to the issues with the voting system.
So, where, in this thread, has OP actually posted a solution?

@MelissaBaby stated that she had ONE story she had this problem with, and that it was resolved when she contacted the site. @EmilyMiller replied that this is how it should work, but that this solution has not worked for her because she did not receive the same level of responsiveness that Melissa did.

I can't see how one could make it clearer than this. responsiveness is an obvious solution to this problem.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

@MelissaBaby stated that she had ONE story she had this problem with, and that it was resolved when she contacted the site. @EmilyMiller replied that this is how it should work, but that this solution has not worked for her because she did not receive the same level of responsiveness that Melissa did.

I can't see how one could make it clearer than this. responsiveness is an obvious solution to this problem.

That's treating a symptom, not the problem.