PPP Under Fire

[Niagara]

1 minute ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

Asking again... why do you want to shut down the Q discussion simply because you disagree with it?
 

Because he is part of the woke cancel culture. He thinks he is Mark Zuckerberg.

[B-Man]

Just now, Tiberius said:

The people you disagree with list. 

 

Myopic to the core 

 

There are several left-leaning PPP posters who are NOT on that list.

 

So (in fact) it is NOT a "disagree with list,

 

but a "POSTER WHO IS NOT WORTH MY TIME" list.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Magox]

49 minutes ago, shoshin said:

 

You can joke about them until you know about them. Then it's less amusing.  

I knew it was within you this whole time.  The mask is off.

 

Dark and seedy past 

[transplantbillsfan]

3 minutes ago, Niagara said:

Because he is part of the woke cancel culture. He thinks he is Mark Zuckerberg.

 

Funny. You're answering a question that was asked based on a completely false premise because of either neglect or an inability to actually read. Don't worry, this is a common problem here.

 

As I said, keep the Q thread open. Don't lock it or close it.

 

That it's open is not a problem.

Edited September 7, 2020 by transplantbillsfan

[Buffalo_Gal]

1 minute ago, transplantbillsfan said:

@Buffalo_Gal... can you read?

I am beginning to question if you are literate.  This might help you.

Asking again a different way ... Why do you want to shut down a discussion (the Q discussion, specifically) because you disagree with the premise?



 

2 minutes ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

Funny. You're answering a question that was asked based on a completely false premise because of either neglect or an inability to actually read. Don't worry, this is a common problem here.

 

As I said, keep the Q thread open. Don't lock it or close it.

 

That it's open is not a problem.

Ok, I see this has been clarified.

So, you do not want the Q thread closed. You do not "mosy" into it. So, why does the  existence of the Q-thread bother you?   You have deemed it a "conspiracy theory" so that makes it wrong somehow?

 

[TakeYouToTasker]

56 minutes ago, shoshin said:

 

I quoted it as an example of the agenda-pushing since Rhino asked for proof that pushes his agenda. 

What is the agenda he is pushing?

 

If he is pushing an agenda, how is that a problem?

 

If it is a problem, how do you differentiate that agenda from every other agenda pushed on this sub-forum, and every other on this board?

[transplantbillsfan]

12 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

I am beginning to question if you are literate.  This might help you.

Asking again a different way ... Why do you want to shut down a discussion (the Q discussion, specifically) because you disagree with the premise?



 

 

Nice ad hominem.

 

Another consistent problem over here.

 

To clear things up because I think it's so ingrained in the psyche over here that what I said just flew over your head:

 

You talk about conspiracy theories like flavors of ice cream. Q is "not my cup of tea," you say. You're "not interested."

 

Why not just call it the crazy, debunked conspiracy theory it is and has proven to be?

 

Instead, you talk about it as though you're shopping around for a car and that Q conspiracy theory is "not my cup of tea," but you'll find another one.

 

And before you get all bent out of shape, I'm just trying to help you understand what you were reading there since you didn't actually understand what I wrote in the context of that particular post by you.

Edited September 7, 2020 by transplantbillsfan

[shoshin]

17 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

What is the agenda he is pushing?

 

If he is pushing an agenda, how is that a problem?

 

If it is a problem, how do you differentiate that agenda from every other agenda pushed on this sub-forum, and every other on this board?

Volume was my point as initially made. 

[Niagara]

12 minutes ago, transplantbillsfan said:

You talk about conspiracy theories like flavors of ice cream. Q is "not my cup of tea," you say. You're "not interested."

 

Why not just call it the crazy, debunked conspiracy theory it is and has proven to be?

 

Instead, you talk about it as though you're shopping around for a car and that Q conspiracy theory is "not my cup of tea," but you'll find another one.

 

And before you get all bent out of shape, I'm just trying to help you understand what you were reading there.

Why does she have to call it anything. As in car models, there are topics of conversation. You might not buy it, but someone else will.

 

26 minutes ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

Funny. You're answering a question that was asked based on a completely false premise because of either neglect or an inability to actually read. Don't worry, this is a common problem here.

Also, you are not needed to help others read, except translate the above.

Edited September 7, 2020 by Niagara

[Buffalo_Gal]

1 minute ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

Nice ad hominem.

 

Another consistent problem over here.

 

To clear things up because I think it's so ingrained in the psyche over here that what I said just flew over your head:

 

You talk about conspiracy theories like flavors of ice cream. Q is "not my cup of tea," you say. You're "not interested."

 

Why not just call it the crazy, debunked conspiracy theory it is and has proven to be?

 

Instead, you talk about it as though you're shopping around for a car and that Q conspiracy theory is "not my cup of tea," but you'll find another one.

 

And before you get all bent out of shape, I'm just trying to help you understand what you were reading there.

Just because you consider something a "conspiracy theory" does not make it a conspiracy theory.  Simply because you deem something not worth the read, does not mean it is not worth the read. Simply because you are offended by looking at a thread topic or discussion does not mean others are offended, does not mean the topic should not be discussed, does not mean the thread should not exist or be deleted.

I cannot decide if you truly do not understand that your beliefs might not be other people's beliefs; that other people are allowed to have beliefs other than yours, or if you are being disingenuous. Suppressing speech and ideas you disagree with is not a good thing.   (People are gonna place bets that you are Democrat if you continue on in this fashion. 😉 )

And once again, since you are having a hard time with this: because I think Q is woo-woo does not mean other people think that way.  It could turn out that Q ends up being spot on, and I was wrong. I would never want discussion about Q silenced because I do not intend to enter the discussion.

 

[3rdnlng]

6 minutes ago, Niagara said:

Why does she have to call it anything. As in car models, there are topics of conversation. You might not buy it, but someone else will.

 

Also, you are not needed to help others read, except translate the above.

How would you like him to be your teacher?

[RochesterRob]

3 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

Just because you consider something a "conspiracy theory" does not make it a conspiracy theory.  Simply because you deem something not worth the read, does not mean it is not worth the read. Simply because you are offended by looking at a thread topic or discussion does not mean others are offended, does not mean the topic should not be discussed, does not mean the thread should not exist or be deleted.

I cannot decide if you truly do not understand that your beliefs might not be other people's beliefs; that other people are allowed to have beliefs other than yours, or if you are being disingenuous. Suppressing speech and ideas you disagree with is not a good thing.   (People are gonna place bets that you are Democrat if you continue on in this fashion. 😉 )

And once again, since you are having a hard time with this: because I think Q is woo-woo does not mean other people think that way.  It could turn out that Q ends up being spot on, and I was wrong. I would never want discussion about Q silenced because I do not intend to enter the discussion.

 

  I know that we are supposed to be more ............. understanding of the other guy here.  But I think there is a certain core of lefties that are engaged in a never ending barrage of gaslighting here.  They believe if that they are successful all discussion will be shutdown here that is not favorable to their causes.

[Niagara]

2 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

How would you like him to be your teacher?

It is nonsense, and he wrote it. He claims to have superb reading skills, and I wanted him to demonstrate them. Maybe I missed something.

[SectionC3]

5 hours ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

 

...so list yours Big Dawg.....you're here to stir the pot anyway..............

 

I'm not the one with the complaint, Old Dawg. That's you. 

[3rdnlng]

36 minutes ago, Niagara said:

It is nonsense, and he wrote it. He claims to have superb reading skills, and I wanted him to demonstrate them. Maybe I missed something.

Grammar aside, he's supposedly a high school teacher in Hawaii. 

[TakeYouToTasker]

51 minutes ago, shoshin said:

Volume was my point as initially made. 

Can you expand on this?  I’m not sure exactly what you mean by volume in this sense.  Do you mean the amount of posts in a thread on a given topic?  Do you mean frequency of any one individual’s posts on a topic, or in general?  Do you mean the amount of items that may be cross posted across different threads because they may be relevant to multiple topics?

[njbuff]

Just send this crying fool over here to PPP and everything will be fine.

 

 

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

2 hours ago, shoshin said:

 

The line goes something like this, "If you're not willing to read 1000 pages about [Q, Deep State, etc], you're not doing research and an ignorant MSM-believing lemming." And then the name-calling starts. 

 

It's a great community of people, really. An uplifting addition to twobillsdrive.com. 

 

I'm sorry, did I miss the part where someone pistol whipped you and forced you to come here? If so, damn.

[Q-baby!]

23 minutes ago, Joe in Winslow said:

 

I'm sorry, did I miss the part where someone pistol whipped you and forced you to come here? If so, damn.

That’s not what he said slow joe! 

[Azalin]

24 minutes ago, Joe in Winslow said:

 

I'm sorry, did I miss the part where someone pistol whipped you and forced you to come here? If so, damn.

 

Some people just can't abide others enjoying something of which they do not approve. 

[meazza]

4 minutes ago, Azalin said:

 

Some people just can't abide others enjoying something of which they do not approve. 

 

Exactly.  Just don’t read threads that don’t interest you.  

[Niagara]

1 hour ago, 3rdnlng said:

Grammar aside, he's supposedly a high school teacher in Hawaii. 

An educator. Cancel culture. Woke know it all. I am not surprised or impressed.

[Westside]

2 hours ago, Crayola64 said:

Yes!  I know he mainly spams against other trolls, but 99% of his posts are textbook spam in my opinion.  

So you agree the large majority of trolls and spammers are liberals? 

2 hours ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

Nice ad hominem.

 

Another consistent problem over here.

 

To clear things up because I think it's so ingrained in the psyche over here that what I said just flew over your head:

 

You talk about conspiracy theories like flavors of ice cream. Q is "not my cup of tea," you say. You're "not interested."

 

Why not just call it the crazy, debunked conspiracy theory it is and has proven to be?

 

Instead, you talk about it as though you're shopping around for a car and that Q conspiracy theory is "not my cup of tea," but you'll find another one.

 

And before you get all bent out of shape, I'm just trying to help you understand what you were reading there since you didn't actually understand what I wrote in the context of that particular post by you.

Says the guy who still believes in the Russian hoax. Maybe you should take your own advice?

[Q-baby!]

3 minutes ago, westside2 said:

So you agree the large majority of trolls and spammers are liberals? 

So you agree the large majority of posters on PPP are nutbar cult Trumptards? 

[BillStime]

5 hours ago, Unforgiven said:

 

 

Tho I call it my varmint list.

I support free speech these guys can post whatever they want,

I just don't have to read it.

 

👆delusional 

 

👇Truth

[Deranged Rhino]

4 hours ago, shoshin said:

Shirley you jest. 

 

Discussing current events is now an agenda? That's a new one. 

4 hours ago, shoshin said:

 

I quoted it as an example of the agenda-pushing since Rhino asked for proof that pushes his agenda. 

 

What specific agenda was being pushed? Show your work. 

[B-Man]

1 hour ago, BillStime said:

 

 

👇Truth

So . . . . . 
 

taking a picture of people saying the Pledge of Allegiance

 

combine it with an unfounded open ended statement  

 

and that’s supposed to make some sort of point ?

 

 

oh wait, it does. . . . . . about you 😂

 

 

 

[Niagara]

2 minutes ago, B-Man said:

So . . . . . 
 

taking a picture of people saying the Pledge of Allegiance

 

combine it with an unfounded open ended statement  

 

and that’s supposed to make some sort of point ?

 

 

oh wait, it does. . . . . . about you 😂

 

 

 

This thread was about how to deal with a BillSimme type, and it was I thought agreed the best way was NOT to reply. Reply to one and get another hundred.

[B-Man]

2 minutes ago, Niagara said:

This thread was about how to deal with a BillSimme type, and it was I thought agreed the best way was NOT to reply. Reply to one and get another hundred.

Fair enough. 
 

 

[bdutton]

17 minutes ago, B-Man said:

So . . . . . 
 

taking a picture of people saying the Pledge of Allegiance

 

combine it with an unfounded open ended statement  

 

and that’s supposed to make some sort of point ?

 

 

oh wait, it does. . . . . . about you 😂

 

 

 

Actually, only current and past members of the military salute during the national anthem.  Civilians are expected to remove their hats and place their hand on their heart.

 

So the poster is insulting veterans and the National Anthem.

[shoshin]

2 hours ago, Joe in Winslow said:

 

I'm sorry, did I miss the part where someone pistol whipped you and forced you to come here? If so, damn.

 

Nope. We're talking about the merits of PPP. I weighed in that it's a stain on the entirety of this site. 

 

You think it's a positive and uplifting place. We differ. 

1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Discussing current events is now an agenda? That's a new one. 

 

What specific agenda was being pushed? Show your work. 

 

Yeah, you have no agenda. That's at least good for a laugh, thank you. 

[Niagara]

4 hours ago, transplantbillsfan said:

 

Nice ad hominem.

 

Another consistent problem over here.

 

To clear things up because I think it's so ingrained in the psyche over here that what I said just flew over your head:

 

You talk about conspiracy theories like flavors of ice cream. Q is "not my cup of tea," you say. You're "not interested."

 

Why not just call it the crazy, debunked conspiracy theory it is and has proven to be?

 

Instead, you talk about it as though you're shopping around for a car and that Q conspiracy theory is "not my cup of tea," but you'll find another one.

 

And before you get all bent out of shape, I'm just trying to help you understand what you were reading there since you didn't actually understand what I wrote in the context of that particular post by you.

For a teacher, your language skills really suk. Before you can explain something, you first must be able to properly verbalize. Poor students. Who begins a sentence "To clear things up because..."? Its laughable.

Edited September 8, 2020 by Niagara

[Westside]

10 minutes ago, shoshin said:

 

Nope. We're talking about the merits of PPP. I weighed in that it's a stain on the entirety of this site. 

 

You think it's a positive and uplifting place. We differ. 

 

Yet, here you are. Contributing to the "stain". Why don't you take your holier than though crap and leave. That action alone will greatly improve PPP.

[Niagara]

6 minutes ago, westside2 said:

Yet, here you are. Contributing to the "stain". Why don't you take your holier than though crap and leave. That action alone will greatly improve PPP.

When all is lost yell, call names, burn and destroy things, or call  it a "stain".  They are a blight.

[3rdnlng]

1 hour ago, Niagara said:

This thread was about how to deal with a BillSimme type, and it was I thought agreed the best way was NOT to reply. Reply to one and get another hundred.

Nothing has been agreed to yet. If we are going to be successful with the "shunning" approach we need a more formal mechanism. If we go that route we should also probably get SDS's approval. I'm talking about something like a 3 person panel of known fair and reasonable posters that can make a determination for a voluntary shun that would be recommended to all posters. Anyone else have any ideas?

[Buffalo_Gal]

3 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

Nothing has been agreed to yet. If we are going to be successful with the "shunning" approach we need a more formal mechanism. If we go that route we should also probably get SDS's approval. I'm talking about something like a 3 person panel of known fair and reasonable posters that can make a determination for a voluntary shun that would be recommended to all posters. Anyone else have any ideas?

1. Use the ignore function.
2.  If you choose not to use the ignore function, do not engage.

That is all. 🙂

[3rdnlng]

Just now, Buffalo_Gal said:

1. Use the ignore function.
2.  If you choose not to use the ignore function, do not engage.

That is all. 🙂

Except that hasn't worked very well in the past.

[bdutton]

1 minute ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

1. Use the ignore function.
2.  If you choose not to use the ignore function, do not engage.

That is all. 🙂

This.  Its about being more mature that the trolls.

[Buffalo_Gal]

12 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

Except that hasn't worked very well in the past.

Because “I know what you are, but what am I?” discourse does not further the discussion. Honestly? The trolls are not solely to blame. Their schtick only works with a participating audience. No audience? No participation? They either get bored and go away, or talk to themselves. 
 

It also takes about 12 seconds to identify a sock puppet. We are not dealing with the masters of disguise. Again, ignore function.

 

Is it tedious? Yes. Will it make for a better sub-forum? Hopefully.

 

Note that I say trolls. I do not mean people on the other side of the political aisle who do engage in substantive arguments. Listening, engaging, and discussing both sides of any argument makes for great debate.

 

 

[Deranged Rhino]

3 hours ago, shoshin said:

Yeah, you have no agenda. That's at least good for a laugh, thank you. 

Then it should be very simple for you to be specific and tell me what that agenda is. Show your work.