• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

CNN Doxxes a gif maker

The Big Dog said:
All of them.

Now of course your posts can be both serious and silly. Say for example someone were to write "as a conservative" and then write an over the top strawman. They could be subjectively dead serious, while objectively being silly.

Savvy?
Click to expand...

I like how I got you to argue in defense of a typo.
 
johnny karate said:
No, that's incorrect.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but it is. You were engaged in mirroring. You expected me to think about my side like you do about your own side, and thought that you could undercut my argument by showing that it doesn't match how you expected me to think about my own side. But there's no reason to believe I would think that about my side unless you were engaged in mirroring.
 
Ziggurat said:
Sorry, but it is. You were engaged in mirroring. You expected me to think about my side like you do about your own side, and thought that you could undercut my argument by showing that it doesn't match how you expected me to think about my own side. But there's no reason to believe I would think that about my side unless you were engaged in mirroring.
Click to expand...

You were engaged in mirroring first. I expected you to think about your side like I do about my own side only after you expected me to think about my side like you do about your own side, and I thought that I could undercut your argument by showing that it doesn't match how I expected you to think about your own side only after you thought that you could undercut my argument by showing that it doesn't match how you expected me to think about my own side. But there's no reason to believe you would think that about your side after there was no reason to believe I would think that about my side unless you were engaged in mirroring first.

Does the right not like living by the rules it created?
 
johnny karate said:
You were engaged in mirroring first. I expected you to think about your side like I do about my own side only after you expected me to think about my side like you do about your own side, and I thought that I could undercut your argument by showing that it doesn't match how I expected you to think about your own side only after you thought that you could undercut my argument by showing that it doesn't match how you expected me to think about my own side. But there's no reason to believe you would think that about your side after there was no reason to believe I would think that about my side unless you were engaged in mirroring first.

Does the right not like living by the rules it created?
Click to expand...

You can't even pull off a half-decent parody. :nope:
 
johnny karate said:
It's hard to parody something that's already ridiculous.
Click to expand...

If it's really that ridiculous, you shouldn't have to resort to parody. You should be able to easily crush it with the weight of logic and facts.

But you abandoned that paltry effort pretty quickly.
 
Ziggurat said:
The strategy is the rules here. The strategy is what really matters. And the strategy is to hurt individuals for wrong-think. The left has normalized this strategy. And now, it will live with the rules it created.
Click to expand...

johnny karate said:
Does the right not like living by the rules it created?
Click to expand...

I have not seen any convincing evidence that either the left or the right originated the strategy of punishing people for wrongthink. Surely left-wing and right-wing authoritarians have been making use of this strategy as far back as left/right politics have existed. And long before that, there were an array of laws criminalizing blasphemy and sedition.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
 
Last edited:
Ziggurat said:
If it's really that ridiculous, you shouldn't have to resort to parody. You should be able to easily crush it with the weight of logic and facts.
Click to expand...

"Mockery is more efficient."

- Saul Alinsky
Rules for Radicals - Special Edition for Leftists Only
 
johnny karate said:
"Mockery is more efficient."

- Saul Alinsky
Rules for Radicals - Special Edition for Leftists Only
Click to expand...

Why would you bother to invent a false quote from Alinksy when he actually said pretty much the same thing?

Saul Alinksy said:
"Ridicule is man's most potent weapon." There is no defense. It's irrational.
Click to expand...

And it's true: ridicule can be quite effective, when it's well done (yours wasn't). But done well or poorly, it's irrational.
 
Ziggurat said:
Why would you bother to invent a false quote from Alinksy when he actually said pretty much the same thing?
Click to expand...

Because I'm not obsessed with Saul Alinsky?

And it's true: ridicule can be quite effective, when it's well done (yours wasn't). But done well or poorly, it's irrational.
Click to expand...

No, that's incorrect.
 
Surely there is another thread, somewhere in this vast array, more clearly dedicated to discussing Alinsky and his ideas. Unless I'm missing something, he has nothing much to do with either doxing or CNN.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
 
Last edited:
d4m10n said:
I have not seen any convincing evidence that either the left or the right originated the strategy of punishing people for wrongthink. Surely left-wing and right-wing authoritarians have been making use of this strategy as far back as left/right politics have existed. And long before that, there were an array of laws criminalizing blasphemy and sedition.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
Click to expand...

While I can very much agree with Zig that there are many aspects of modern 'callout/outrage' culture that are very problematic (over-reaction, 'ruined forever', being 'wrong' on anything making someone a bad person as opposed to simply mistaken, no-platforming, identity-politics tribalism, etc), it isn't nearly as partizan as he asserts it is. Much of this type of negative consequences have been applied to some groups of people for a long time. Right now, groups that before had the privilege of it not being applied to them for a very long time in the US are suddenly worried about it and feeling the sting of some more equality. To them it seems like they're losing some 'rights' or power, when it's just everyone else has gained some. It used to be 'communists' (anyone not right-wing) who had lives destroyed this way. Or gay people. Or atheists. Suddenly it's right-wing Christians who might get some poor treatment and now it's supposed to be a new, 'special' problem?

Liberals didn't invent the concept of shaming. That is laughable and exactly what is being said.

The big difference is that, in the case and many of the more recent ones, they deserve to be shamed. What makes shaming right or wrong as a tactic is if what was done was actually shamefully wrong or if it was just unpopular. If one doesn't think that what HAS did was shameful, then CNN pointing out they refrained from linking his statements to his name seems like a threat. If you think what HAS did was shameful (like doxing people for being Jewish), then CNN comes off almost as bragging ('yeah, we could have totally screwed this guy, but we're totes better than him').
 
tyr_13 said:
The big difference is that, in the case and many of the more recent ones, they deserve to be shamed.
Click to expand...

This is special pleading.

What makes shaming right or wrong as a tactic is if what was done was actually shamefully wrong or if it was just unpopular.
Click to expand...

Shaming? Oh, it's more than that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom