Dearest DU: An excellent way to occupy the attention of otherwise productive people

[sibelian]

- thus disrupting the flow of useful information is to spend vast amounts of time purposefully misinterpreting what is said or refusing to address the main point made. It's possible to waste an utterly extraordinary amount of everyone's time by simply making one's "opponent" explain thesemselves over and over again.

One is then in a marvellous position to say things like: "You're repeating yourself" or "You're going on and on a about this." It's a simple, manipulative trick.

Disruption is clearly observable. Anyone who finds fault with some perfectly trivial aspect of the main thrust of an argument is wasting everyone's time.

Deliberately.

[Maedhros]

1. It's a symptom of poor critical thinking and debating skills.

When you can't refute an argument, make it about semantics.

[merrily]

2. And just exactly what do you mean by "make it?"

[merrily]

3. Dearest sibelian, thank you for the reminder.

[PeaceNikki]

4. There's a jury out on this, fyi

[merrily]

7. Are you kidding?

[PeaceNikki]

9. I kid you not.

[merrily]

11. Good grief. I must be missing something huge because I see nothing but niceness in the post.

Thanks for the heads up.

[PeaceNikki]

12. The alerter said: "meta". Here are results:

UTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service
Mail Message
On Thu Feb 12, 2015, 04:03 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Dearest DU: An excellent way to occupy the attention of otherwise productive people
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026216800

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

meta

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu Feb 12, 2015, 04:42 PM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Meta? I don't think so. This is a very valid point. LEAVE.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I fail to find fault with the truth.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: It's disruptive meta alright. But that is a host issue please alert to the proper authorities.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This alert is thoroughly ridiculous. The post is acceptable.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: THis should have been an SOP alert... not a jury alert. I'm not giving the poster a hide for this.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Is there something wrong with this post?? I'm confused

[merrily]

14. Thank you. LOL, I was not on that jury. If I were, I'd obviously be Juror 7.

Shout out to juror 7, whoever you may be.

[sibelian]

18. Hm!

Schtick seems to be wearing somewhat thin now...

[HappyMe]

8. Good grief!

[Blue_Tires]

5. I'd appreciate you adding all your observations here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/118710366

trying to collect a repository

[sibelian]

20. Am I actually talking about trolling, though?

I would have thought a person considering themselves genuinely interested in debate could still throw themselves wholeheartedly into what I've attempted to describe. I've always thought trolling was conscious but disruption could be unconscious.

[Blue_Tires]

21. Well, debate tactics are debate tactics...

And some forms of trolling involve nothing more than intentionally applying an inappropriate debate tactic to derail discussion...

[sibelian]

22. You speak the truth.

And how could we ever tell the difference?

[el_bryanto]

6. I suppose it depends on your goal is

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!" - Upton Sinclair

Not that people are paid to post her (I don't believe that myself) - but once you have staked out a position it's hard to want to listen to evidence that doesn't support that position.

Bryant

[merrily]

10. That quote is great.

Not that people are paid to post here (I don't believe that myself)

People are paid to post by the post. And others post as part of their job description. I've seen articles saying both those things. Some have other kinds of economic and noneconomic stakes in posting. That's common sense.

I am not sure why it would not happen here. It's a large board and, for example, politicians spend a boatload of money on one TV ad. So, for example, why would a Democratic politician not spend a few bucks to have his or image protected/defended on DU?

[hunter]

13. My own attention is rarely occupied in this manner... but it's probably because I'm not "productive"

If anyone criticizes me for my spelling or grammar, or tries to derail the conversation, I laugh at them or ignore them.

That's probably just one more reason I was "asked" to leave university twice and it took me nine years to graduate. I burned through a few thesis advisors.

Oh well.

Speak strongly for what you believe in, listen to the thoughtful responses, and don't listen to, or make noise.

I quit broadcast, satellite, cable television, and commercial radio because it was all noise.

I think I'm more informed now than I ever was, and better yet, I go days and days without experiencing any advertising except for the stuff in my local newspapers, which is potentially interesting or easily dismissed, and highly technical and apolitical stuff on the highly technical and apolitical web sites I visit.

When I click on some silly youtube cat video here on DU I'm still more likely to get an ad for some kind of lab equipment or shop machine than an ad for cat food or political candidate.

[Rex]

15. Did that a lot on DU2 with the mega-troll The Dude.

Won't waste any time on mega-trolls on DU3.

[sibelian]

19. Their persistence is admirable

- though a little sad.

[olddots]

16. Son if you don't stop debating you'll go blind !

Dad I'm over here .

[sibelian]

24. heh!

That's too close to the bone...

[woo me with science]

17. K&R

[woo me with science]

23. kick