Troll Wrestling Federation

[Tom Sawyer]

Roger,

A sincerely held, candidly expressed intellectual or philosophical disagreement is not "trolling," it is the stuff from which online forums are built.

To characterize it as "trolling," is to reveal your misunderstanding of the meaning of the term, which is derived not from the name for under-bridge dwelling creatures, but rather "trailing bait behind a slow-moving boat waiting for eager fish to snap at it."  In the online world, it's "Posting derogatory messages about sensitive subjects on newsgroups and chat rooms to bait users into responding."

I've been using online fora since 1984, so trust me, I know what trolling is, and saying that the liberation of the brutally oppressed Iraqi people was a Good Thing is not it.

Why are you so bent on enforcing intellectual conformity here by stooping to infantile name-calling?

Are you here to wrestle?

[mvpel]

[Tom Sawyer]

The use of troll is more directed at Objectivist...
He posts threads designed to incite and he is not interested in insight. After he says 'I'm taking my ball and going home.'

Some others are just unhappy that their team lost and now instead of going back to prepare for the next game they would rather workout their aggression here.

Still others like to hijack threads and blather on about their pet theories even though no one else (on this forum) is interested.

So I've created a place for folks to wrestle... anything goes... so in that spirit I'm now going to grab a metal folding chair and crack you across the back while the referee is distracted.

WHAMMMM!!!


A little harsh maybe... nahhh... what's a minor injury compared to raining hell from the sky on children?

[Objectivist]

A little harsh maybe... nahhh... what's a minor injury compared to raining hell from the sky on children?

Or airplanes flying into peaceful centers of trade?.....

BOINK [Objectivist poke Roger in the eye]

Objecivist 

[Objectivist]

Roger,

A sincerely held, candidly expressed intellectual or philosophical disagreement is not "trolling," it is the stuff from which online forums are built.

To characterize it as "trolling," is to reveal your misunderstanding of the meaning of the term, which is derived not from the name for under-bridge dwelling creatures, but rather "trailing bait behind a slow-moving boat waiting for eager fish to snap at it."  In the online world, it's "Posting derogatory messages about sensitive subjects on newsgroups and chat rooms to bait users into responding."

I've been using online fora since 1984, so trust me, I know what trolling is, and saying that the liberation of the brutally oppressed Iraqi people was a Good Thing is not it.

Why are you so bent on enforcing intellectual conformity here by stooping to infantile name-calling?

Karma for mvpel.

Mvpel, you have the second lowest Karma in the history of this forum... 

I beat you out for first.  (A laudable accomplishment, considering the company?)

Objectivist

[eques]

Wrong again, Objectivist.

Look up FrankChodorov for an example.

[Objectivist]

Wrong again, Objectivist.

Look up FrankChodorov for an example.

Why that son-of-a...... I don't really even like him very much. 

Now look, all we need to do is spread Rand's philosophy. The rest will take care of itself. Sort of. It comes down to people acting at the end of the day, but nothing convinces and motivates like logic. A few centuries (millenia?)  from now everything will be fine.

[Objectivist rolls up his sleeves... Oh, wait, they're already rolled up!]

Objectivist

[Ear]

Now look, all we need to do is spread

ourselves thin in the Middle East killing babies and civilians, and call it

Rand's philosophy. The rest will take care of itself. Sort of. It comes down to people acting

like pigs who think that higher taxes are the lesser evil compared with mass murder. Swill is delicious

at the end of the day, but nothing convinces and motivates like

repeating the same outrageous lies over and over and over. Ask Hitler. That was his

logic. A few centuries (millenia?)  from now everything will be fine.

As in final solution.  Oink.

[error]

Hey, not to interrupt, but I thought it was

Troll Wrestling Entertainment

[Objectivist]

Now look, all we need to do is spread

ourselves thin in the Middle East killing babies and civilians, and call it

Rand's philosophy. The rest will take care of itself. Sort of. It comes down to people acting

like pigs who think that higher taxes are the lesser evil compared with mass murder. Swill is delicious

at the end of the day, but nothing convinces and motivates like

repeating the same outrageous lies over and over and over. Ask Hitler. That was his

logic. A few centuries (millenia?)  from now everything will be fine.

As in final solution.  Oink.

Creative. You might actually accomplish something..... Someday. 

[crowd: "WWWWWWWHOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAAAAA"]

Objectivist

[FrankChodorov]

Wrong again, Objectivist.

Look up FrankChodorov for an example.

Why that son-of-a...... I don't really even like him very much. 

the feeling is mutualist I assure you...

you have to divide the karma by the number of posts to find out how much you are despised...

[Lloyd Danforth]

You don't even have the foggiest idea what real "oppression" is, do you?

The Kurds sure are happy we're there - see http://www.theotheriraq.com/ - they no longer have to fear chemical genocide at the hands of Saddam's Ba'thist thugs.

You sure do use a broad brush, don't you, characterizing the Iraqi opponents as representative of the 26 million Iraqi people, when they're more likely to be representative of the deposed thugocracy; or of an aspiring thugocracy; or of Syrian, Iranian, and Saudi Muslim fundamentalists thirsting for a chance to kill infidels or die trying.

You seem to enjoy trotting out "First they came for the Jews..." in ominous tones whenever the US does anything, but what about "First they came for the Kurds?"



Here's another quote for you - "If not the US, who?  If not now, when?" - after 900,000 (more) are hacked to death like they were in Rwanda while the UN and the Clinton Administration wrung their hankies?  After 10 million were slaughtered while FDR stalled and delayed and implemented half-measures in 1944, five years after sending refugees abord the SS St. Louis back to their deaths in the inferno of Nazi Europe?  When?

Why should the US government commit it's population money and lives to any of this at all?  If this were a truly free country, you would be free to send your wealth and child to fight along with and against these backward nations and I would be free to not.

[eques]

Wrong again, Objectivist.

Look up FrankChodorov for an example.

Why that son-of-a...... I don't really even like him very much. 

the feeling is mutualist I assure you...

you have to divide the karma by the number of posts to find out how much you are despised...

Dude, are you so sold out on "mutualism" that you can't even say "mutual" when the situation warrants? 

[FrankChodorov]

Wrong again, Objectivist.

Look up FrankChodorov for an example.

Why that son-of-a...... I don't really even like him very much. 

the feeling is mutualist I assure you...

you have to divide the karma by the number of posts to find out how much you are despised...

Dude, are you so sold out on "mutualism" that you can't even say "mutual" when the situation warrants? 

a John Kerryesque attempt at humor...

[eques]

You don't even have the foggiest idea what real "oppression" is, do you?

The Kurds sure are happy we're there - see http://www.theotheriraq.com/ - they no longer have to fear chemical genocide at the hands of Saddam's Ba'thist thugs.

You sure do use a broad brush, don't you, characterizing the Iraqi opponents as representative of the 26 million Iraqi people, when they're more likely to be representative of the deposed thugocracy; or of an aspiring thugocracy; or of Syrian, Iranian, and Saudi Muslim fundamentalists thirsting for a chance to kill infidels or die trying.

You seem to enjoy trotting out "First they came for the Jews..." in ominous tones whenever the US does anything, but what about "First they came for the Kurds?"



Here's another quote for you - "If not the US, who?  If not now, when?" - after 900,000 (more) are hacked to death like they were in Rwanda while the UN and the Clinton Administration wrung their hankies?  After 10 million were slaughtered while FDR stalled and delayed and implemented half-measures in 1944, five years after sending refugees abord the SS St. Louis back to their deaths in the inferno of Nazi Europe?  When?

I'm no big fan of nation-states as it is, but I think that the Kurds should probably have their own nation at the very least.  I mean, they're fairly cohesive in terms of culture, region, and the like... only thing is, I don't see Turkey or Iran giving up their respective portions of "Kurdistan" anytime soon, so I don't really think my stance is realistic.