Skip to main content

View Diary: While We Are Subjected To Kabuki Theater The Country Continues March Towards Authoritarianism (104 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  what questions are you talking about, actually? (4+ / 0-)

    It seems to me that Ray and you are repeating yourselves a lot more than anybody else is.

    Of course nobody can compel Ray to respond in good faith to reasonable comments. That doesn't make the comments unreasonable.

    But it's far weirder than that. You've said that having a DBAD pointed at you isn't a problem. But if you had never posted in this diary, there's no reason to think that WB ever would have, either. So, really, what on earth are you running on about for over 1,000 words now?

    "I am not sure how we got here, but then, I am not really sure where we are." -Susan from 29

    by HudsonValleyMark on Wed Oct 16, 2013 at 01:36:29 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  That's a real good question (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Hey338Too

      but according to 3rd Option, I'm the one who's obsessed and possibly mentally unbalanced.

      Sad.

      Nothing human is alien to me.

      by WB Reeves on Wed Oct 16, 2013 at 02:09:12 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  And there you have the incitement to engage in (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        3rdOption

        unjustifiable HRs and lobbing banning threats.  It's too formulaic by now.  He's clearly not saying you are mentally unbalanced.

        Either way, this question is relevant:

        What is wrong with you, that you cannot simply avoid Ray's diaries by not clicking on them?
        That is a relevant question.  I don't think is customary for users to click on diaries of writers they have a negative opinion of.
        •  No incitement, just facts (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Hey338Too

          He's quite clearly suggesting that I have mental problems. If you really think otherwise, report the incident and see what the admins say.

          The question isn't relevant since it was already answered. 3rd Option and yourself simply don't want to accept the answer given.  

          Nothing human is alien to me.

          by WB Reeves on Wed Oct 16, 2013 at 02:33:22 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  "Quite clearly" by specifically stating the... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Ray Pensador

            ...opposite.

            Nice.

            He's quite clearly suggesting that I have mental problems.
            after I clearly stated:
            (Footnote: I'm not talking about "mental" health here, I'm talking about ethical health...)
            This is a blatantly HRable offense. Where are my HRs then? Don't you have one to spare today?
            The question isn't relevant since it was already answered.
            Saying:
            As for why some may feel compelled to bring up the same criticisms repeatedly, that might have something to do with Ray's refusal/inability to answer them.
            has been proven to be patently illogical. I wrote a way-too-long post basically proving this repeatedly, and I'm not about to repeat it all.

            If I did, I would be doing exactly what you folks are doing; asking the same question that someone refuses to answer repeatedly, while knowing an answer will not be forthcoming.

            The reason you will not explain your motives is because the true and honest answer is exceeding unflattering.

            If you were acting in good faith, you would have bailed long ago.

            And now you cannot cop to your actual motives, even though you've been trapped in a logical corner, surrounded by enemy rooks and bishops, unable to move, unwilling to accept a checkmate.

            I understand why you cannot answer the question:

            If you know Ray is not going to respond in the way you think he should, EVER, why do you keep hectoring him about it?

            Why haven't you just accepted that he is unmovable, and skipped over Ray's writings on the way to diaries that you feel more comfortable with?

            Since I have a good idea of the answer(s) to this question (which I alluded to in one of my previous TL;DR comments), and I am certain that you are unwilling or unable to come clean, I'll stop asking it now.


            "Politeness is wasted on the dishonest, who will always take advantage of any well-intended concession." - Barrett Brown

            by 3rdOption on Wed Oct 16, 2013 at 03:04:28 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Oh, in a footnote (0+ / 0-)

              Obviously you knew exactly what you were saying and exactly how it would be taken, otherwise you wouldn't have thought it prudent to insert this disclaimer, albeit in a footnote.

              While this verbal fig leaf may get you off the hook, it makes it quite plain what your notions of ethical behavior are worth. Likewise your opinions of what's truthful or honest. Contrary to your apparent belief, you are neither a mind reader or a prophet and have no standing whatever to pontificate on the motives of others. That you think otherwise is, as I said elsewhere, sad.

              Your "question" is thoroughly dishonest. Again, I did not accost Ray. My comment was addressed to you. Ray chose to insert himself. To suggest otherwise is pure fabrication on your part.

              Clean up your own act.

               

              Nothing human is alien to me.

              by WB Reeves on Wed Oct 16, 2013 at 03:41:31 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  "I know what you are, but what am I?" (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Ray Pensador

                You know the thread is too long and narrow when your opponent uses middle skool logic while flailing in mid-fail.

                (See what I did there? That's a "call back".)

                So where's the HR then? I keep asking, yet none is forthcoming.

                Oh, and then there's this tidbit:

                I think you have great capacity for rational thought.
                Clearly an attack on your mental acuity/health.

                Want to resolve all of your problems with Ray? Simply stop clicking on his diaries.

                No matter how tempted, how compelled, how deep the urge, "Just say NO!" to clicking on Ray Pensador's diaries.

                Imagine the sense of peace and equanimity that would wash over you, just by skipping over that one little link.

                Perhaps we need a twelve-step program, for those addicted to shitting in Ray's diaries.


                "Politeness is wasted on the dishonest, who will always take advantage of any well-intended concession." - Barrett Brown

                by 3rdOption on Wed Oct 16, 2013 at 05:14:25 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I doubt you know enough about twelve step programs (0+ / 0-)

                  to judge their applicability. They require a modicum of honest self criticism.

                  So if you weren't intentionally insinuating mental illness, how was it that you thought it necessary to attach a disclaimer? If you weren't intentionally seeking to be prejudicial, why did you put it at the end of your comment rather than the top? If you were actually concerned to not give a false impression, the logical place to make the point would be at the beginning not in a foot note at the bottom.

                  Hmm?

                   

                  Nothing human is alien to me.

                  by WB Reeves on Thu Oct 17, 2013 at 02:03:59 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Did you even read the fucking comment you... (0+ / 0-)

                    ...replied to?

                    I think you have great capacity for rational thought.
                    Finally, and I mean finally, when you have to resort to this:
                    I doubt you know enough about twelve step programs to judge their applicability. They require a modicum of honest self criticism.
                    The thread is done.

                    But of course:

                    "You ain't the boss o' me! I'll stop commenting when I decide to stop commenting!!! This thread isn't over 'till I say it's over!!!"


                    "Politeness is wasted on the dishonest, who will always take advantage of any well-intended concession." - Barrett Brown

                    by 3rdOption on Thu Oct 17, 2013 at 07:11:43 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

          •  here I disagree (4+ / 0-)

            I think 3rdOption more clearly was insinuating that you are evil, probably not deranged. Apparently criminal, too, given all those "illicit"s, although I suppose that can mean pretty much whatever 3rdOption wants it to mean. Let's just say that it all seems pretty far off topic.

            As for the notion that you were trying to incite people to HR, that would be risible under happier circumstances. I don't think Ray has any understanding to this day of why he has been HRed in the past, and he seems comfortable in the unknowing.

            "I am not sure how we got here, but then, I am not really sure where we are." -Susan from 29

            by HudsonValleyMark on Wed Oct 16, 2013 at 04:39:33 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Point taken on "illicit". (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Ray Pensador

              I have never used "illicit" as a pseudonym of "illegal", but upon inspection I see that in fact, it has a much closer tie to legality, or at least following custom, than I had thought.

              "Evil" is too sweeping a word for this situation. I would merely say that, in Ray's diaries, WB Reeves frequently posts from the perspective of a bad-faith commenter. Not always, but often. As do several others.

              As I've stated in my numerous TL;DR diatribes here, any reasonable, good-faith commenter who fundamentally disagreed with Ray would have long ago come to the conclusion that Ray will not alter his perspective, nor will he stop posting, nor will he get banned. A reasonable, good-faith commenter would then say, "Oh, well. No point in arguing with that guy..." and move on, avoiding Ray's diaries from that point forward.

              Unless there are other, less morally acceptable motives. "Like what?" you may ask. I'll give you one possibility; just fucking with Ray for the fun of it. "For the Lulz."

              I'm not sure if that's one of the motivations, but it certainly is plausible, along with several others that no one who views themselves as "righteous" would want to cop to publicly on this site.

              But I think it's been pretty well defined that, after all this time, good-faith commenters, this abjectly disgusted with his presentation, would have just blown Ray off.


              "Politeness is wasted on the dishonest, who will always take advantage of any well-intended concession." - Barrett Brown

              by 3rdOption on Wed Oct 16, 2013 at 05:03:47 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  whatev (5+ / 0-)

                Speaking only for myself, I think it's odd that Ray so often seems uninterested in his own arguments, but since other people rec his diaries, I will sometimes point out whatever objections I may have. If he has no response, maybe somebody else will -- or maybe someone will agree that my objections have merit. It's like, y'know, political debate.

                I really don't understand people who seem to argue that Ray's work (1) is valuable and (2) should be exempt from critics because he isn't interested in defending it. I guess I'm old-school, but if neither he nor anyone else defends his arguments, how good can they be? When he attacks people instead of defending his arguments, that's like a blinking light that says that we all had better hang on to our wallets.

                "I am not sure how we got here, but then, I am not really sure where we are." -Susan from 29

                by HudsonValleyMark on Wed Oct 16, 2013 at 05:31:31 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I think you're missing the point. (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Ray Pensador
                  seem to argue that Ray's work... (2) should be exempt from critics
                  No one is saying this.

                  But how many times should Ray have to argue with the same people over exactly the same things before they realize that the argument was over dozens of diaries ago?

                  When you reach a point where agreeing to disagree is the logical next step, do you say "Fuck that! It ain't over 'till I say it's over!!" and keep coming back day after day hectoring Ray over the same stuff you've squeezed all the life out of all ready?

                  "You ain't the boss o' me! I can say whatever I want in any diary I want and ain't none you tellin' me utherwize!!!"

                  Err. Ok?

                  And if a commenter has done that crap for months, should Ray suddenly take them seriously if they actually make a salient point that, on the surface, does not appear to be an invitation to further pointless combat? Or should he just write them off and ignore them?

                  For my part, with certain exceptions, I simply don't open comments by the crew that hectors Ray. I don't even bother to read the guts once I see who wrote it. Skim. Skim. Skim. "Oh, here's someone I don't recognize, look, a sincere valid point. Hooray."

                  I've argued with Ray before, but never have I argued the same thing twice, and never have I argued just to fuck with him, or demean him or his perspective.

                  This crew of haters reminds me of the Tea Baggers we just saw flame out in Washington. The "negotiation" was over and done with two weeks ago, but they just wouldn't quit.

                  Just go away. Quit. Leave him alone. Skip over anything authored by Ray Pensador.

                  Unless your day is not complete without an internet fight, for some reason.


                  "Politeness is wasted on the dishonest, who will always take advantage of any well-intended concession." - Barrett Brown

                  by 3rdOption on Wed Oct 16, 2013 at 05:50:43 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  huh? (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Hey338Too, WB Reeves
                    But how many times should Ray have to argue with the same people over exactly the same things before they realize that the argument was over dozens of diaries ago?
                    The argument about debt ceiling kabuki was over dozens of diaries ago? The discussion of October 15 (aka "Tuesday") was over dozens of diaries ago? Seriously?

                    I sometimes find Ray's diaries repetitious, but honestly I'm surprised that you offered this response, and that he recced it.

                    Now, if you continue to tell people to STFU STFU STFU, there isn't much they can say except that they aren't obligated to follow your orders. That doesn't mean that they are hectoring anybody; it means that you are. The same goes for Ray, and for anyone else.

                    For my part, with certain exceptions, I simply don't open comments by the crew that hectors Ray.
                    (blinks)

                    OK, so you're criticizing posts that, "with certain exceptions," you haven't even read.

                    What can I say? I don't think you're doing it right.

                    never have I argued just to fuck with him, or demean him or his perspective.
                    Neither have I, and as far as I can tell, neither has WB Reeves or serendipityisabitch. Nothing prevents you from dishing up these ad hominem smears, but I wish you wouldn't. I don't think that artful ambiguity about specifically whom you are attacking really helps. Again, the same goes for Ray and for anyone else.
                    This crew of haters reminds me of the Tea Baggers we just saw flame out in Washington.
                    Well, I'm not the one making unsupported accusations and demanding that other people do what I say.
                    Just go away. Quit. Leave him alone.
                    If I were "argu[ing] just to fuck with him," you could legitimately tell me to DBAD. As it stands, you don't really seem to have a reason.

                    "I am not sure how we got here, but then, I am not really sure where we are." -Susan from 29

                    by HudsonValleyMark on Thu Oct 17, 2013 at 04:38:04 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Of course you haven't. (0+ / 0-)
                      never have I argued just to fuck with him, or demean him or his perspective.
                      Neither have I
                      We know the hater crew won't learn anything from this, we know you have underhanded motives that can't be acknowledged. We know that, if you were good-faith commenters, you'd have bailed long ago because of Ray's "obvious recalcitrance".

                      We get it.

                      So do you.

                      Cya.


                      "Politeness is wasted on the dishonest, who will always take advantage of any well-intended concession." - Barrett Brown

                      by 3rdOption on Thu Oct 17, 2013 at 07:16:32 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  OK, so, what are my motives? (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        WB Reeves

                        As long as you're accusing me of lying, I think it would be interesting and possibly instructive to learn what you think I really want. I don't see what else anyone could hope to learn from your comments in this diary, beyond something about your comfort level for treating other people poorly while complaining that they're "haters."

                        "I am not sure how we got here, but then, I am not really sure where we are." -Susan from 29

                        by HudsonValleyMark on Thu Oct 17, 2013 at 10:56:36 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

            •  Your point is well taken (0+ / 0-)

              I still have to wonder though; if the intent wasn't to insinuate mental illness and thus prejudice the discussion, why would it have occurred to 3rdOption to insert a disclaimer in the first place? It makes no sense unless 3rdOption knew full well that the comment would be taken that way.

              Nothing human is alien to me.

              by WB Reeves on Thu Oct 17, 2013 at 12:59:13 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (136)
  • Community (62)
  • Memorial Day (31)
  • Culture (26)
  • Environment (24)
  • Science (21)
  • Civil Rights (20)
  • Law (20)
  • Rescued (20)
  • Labor (19)
  • Media (19)
  • Elections (18)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (18)
  • Education (17)
  • Marriage Equality (16)
  • Republicans (16)
  • Economy (15)
  • Ireland (14)
  • Racism (14)
  • Climate Change (13)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site