What are your top 3 most-despised SOPT (Same Old Putrid Tactics)?
|
|
Ponsonby Low
Unregistered User
Join date: 21 May 2008
Posts: 1,893
|
05-19-2009 22:16
From: Mickey Vandeverre 1) Personal attacks, whether on top or off topic.
2) Debating simply for the sake of debating.....no longer on topic...no longer effective.
3) Hypocrites. Posting that you despise something or disapprove of something. Then exhibit very clearly the exact same behavior several hours later.
4) The Buddy System. Having a buddy on hand to come in and save your ass. Handle it yourself, and be a man about it. You too, ladies.
5) 3 and 4 combined. A buddy comes in to save your ass by spewing hype in a fashion that is totally contradictory to the demeanor and persona of the buddy you are saving. If you're going to run with a dog....be a dog....by running with one, you already are.....no amount of hype or spin will change that. More good ones for the list. |
|
Ponsonby Low
Unregistered User
Join date: 21 May 2008
Posts: 1,893
|
05-19-2009 22:19
From: Dana Hickman ^^ THIS ^^ 6) Arguing instead of debating, especially beyond the point of anything meaningful being gained from it. 7) First strike hostility. Misreading something and then posting retorts without first asking for a clarification of what that something meant, or waiting until others have asked and there's no doubt.  Baiting. Intentional cheapshots or snide comments used to draw others into an arguement or drama fest. 9) Misery loves company. Having a bad day and intentionally posting in an obtuse manner so as to upset others and bring them down to your level. 10) Lack of respect, civility, tolerance, common courtesy, benefit of the doubt, agreeing to disagree, how much is this going to matter next week... PERIOD. Indeed. Checking on what was actually intended by a poster is always better than going in with sarcasm/contempt/accusations blazing. |
|
Ponsonby Low
Unregistered User
Join date: 21 May 2008
Posts: 1,893
|
05-19-2009 22:21
From: Anti Antonelli Ugh, I have a bunch of these but I'm not sure I can come up with witty or humorous examples. Guess I'll just slog ahead anyway to get a couple off my chest:
- condescending explanations of the blindingly obvious in an attempt to cast one's opponent in a light of ignorance or stupidity, while at the same time skirting the real issue
- arguing semantics, or a tiny subset of the issue that is so narrowly defined as to be virtually meaningless in the context of the discussion
- pretending to not understand something simple in order to create frustration and possibly draw out an expanded restatement of the same thing, which will often provide an opportunity to argue semantics or otherwise veer sharply away from the real issue again Yeah, these are somewhat subtle and so pass unnoticed as tactics, all too often. Some people seem to specialize in the condescending explanation tactic. The question 'what in my post elicited this dissertation on ______?' should be asked of them more often. |
|
Ponsonby Low
Unregistered User
Join date: 21 May 2008
Posts: 1,893
|
05-19-2009 22:29
Anyone who tries reading even just a few of those (and those in Infiniview Merit's link, too) will see cable news channel political interviews and panels in a whole new light. It's as if the interview/panel participants are TRYING to check off every bad argumentation tactic that's ever been cataloged....
|
|
Anti Antonelli
Deranged Toymaker
Join date: 25 Apr 2006
Posts: 1,091
|
05-19-2009 22:39
From: Ponsonby Low Yeah, these are somewhat subtle and so pass unnoticed as tactics, all too often.
Some people seem to specialize in the condescending explanation tactic. The question 'what in my post elicited this dissertation on ______?' should be asked of them more often. Thanks for the note of support, I have wondered if I'm just too damn picky about these things. Course I still could be... And to make things worse, I've been guilty a few times of the "responding with both guns a-blazin' before checking that there might be another explanation" thing mentioned above 
_____________________
Designer of sensual, tasteful couple's animations - for residents who take their leisure time seriously.  http://slurl.com/secondlife/Brownlee/203/110/109/ 
|
|
Snickers Snook
Odd Princess - Trout 7.3
Join date: 17 Apr 2007
Posts: 746
|
05-19-2009 23:48
Has anyone mentioned putting snide asides into parentheses next to your signature?
Snick (Can't be bothered to read threads in detail)
Snick (Is really above all this)
Snick (Thinks these things really should have periods.)
Snick (Or should start with /me)
_____________________
 Buh-bye forums, it's been good ta know ya.
|
|
Pserendipity Daniels
Assume sarcasm as default
Join date: 21 Dec 2006
Posts: 8,839
|
05-20-2009 00:49
From: Snickers Snook Has anyone mentioned putting snide asides into parentheses next to your signature?
Snick (Can't be bothered to read threads in detail)
Snick (Is really above all this)
Snick (Thinks these things really should have periods.)
Snick (Or should start with /me) Snide? It's usually the source of the illumination. Although I didn't realise that it was so annoying . . . Pep ( . . . so of course I will perpetuate my distinguishing characteristic.) PS It's a PS. PS If it's a sentence it gets a full stop - period in your transatlantic-speak - but if it isn't, it doesn't.
_____________________
Hypocrite lecteur, — mon semblable, — mon frère!
|
|
Pserendipity Daniels
Assume sarcasm as default
Join date: 21 Dec 2006
Posts: 8,839
|
05-20-2009 00:50
From: Sling Trebuchet Answer the qvestion!
You vill answer the qvestion. You remind me of the Gestapo watchmender. Pep (Ve have vays of making you tock)
_____________________
Hypocrite lecteur, — mon semblable, — mon frère!
|
|
Sling Trebuchet
Deleted User
Join date: 20 Jan 2007
Posts: 4,548
|
05-20-2009 01:02
From: Pserendipity Daniels You remind me of the Gestapo watchmender.
Pep (Ve have vays of making you tock) It was a stealth Godwin? Unt still you hev not ansvered the qvestion. You are vriggling.
_____________________
Maggie: We give our residents a lot of tools, to build, create, and manage their lands and objects. That flexibility also requires people to exercise judgment about when things should be used.
http://www.ace-exchange.com/home/story/BDVR/589
|
|
Pserendipity Daniels
Assume sarcasm as default
Join date: 21 Dec 2006
Posts: 8,839
|
05-20-2009 01:05
From: Sling Trebuchet It was a stealth Godwin?
Unt still you hev not ansvered the qvestion.
You are vriggling. Another couple of unacceptable tactics for the list? Pep (Don't you just hate that!)
_____________________
Hypocrite lecteur, — mon semblable, — mon frère!
|
|
Sling Trebuchet
Deleted User
Join date: 20 Jan 2007
Posts: 4,548
|
05-20-2009 01:07
From: Ponsonby Low From: Anti Antonelli Ugh, I have a bunch of these but I'm not sure I can come up with witty or humorous examples. Guess I'll just slog ahead anyway to get a couple off my chest:
- condescending explanations of the blindingly obvious in an attempt to cast one's opponent in a light of ignorance or stupidity, while at the same time skirting the real issue
- arguing semantics, or a tiny subset of the issue that is so narrowly defined as to be virtually meaningless in the context of the discussion
- pretending to not understand something simple in order to create frustration and possibly draw out an expanded restatement of the same thing, which will often provide an opportunity to argue semantics or otherwise veer sharply away from the real issue again Yeah, these are somewhat subtle and so pass unnoticed as tactics, all too often. ... Given that these are a classic fingerprint of someone I am familiar with, I'm a bit taken aback that they would be considered even somewhat subtle.
_____________________
Maggie: We give our residents a lot of tools, to build, create, and manage their lands and objects. That flexibility also requires people to exercise judgment about when things should be used.
http://www.ace-exchange.com/home/story/BDVR/589
|
|
Sling Trebuchet
Deleted User
Join date: 20 Jan 2007
Posts: 4,548
|
05-20-2009 01:15
From: Pserendipity Daniels Another couple of unacceptable tactics for the list?
Pep (Don't you just hate that!) Ansver the qvestion!! Or not. Add to the list: Not preceding each and every opinion with "in my opinion" but insisting that when other people don't do so then they are stating things as absolute fact. It's a classic drama-raising SOPT.
_____________________
Maggie: We give our residents a lot of tools, to build, create, and manage their lands and objects. That flexibility also requires people to exercise judgment about when things should be used.
http://www.ace-exchange.com/home/story/BDVR/589
|
|
Pserendipity Daniels
Assume sarcasm as default
Join date: 21 Dec 2006
Posts: 8,839
|
05-20-2009 01:17
From: Sling Trebuchet Ansver the qvestion!!
Or not.
Add to the list:
Not preceding each and every opinion with "in my opinion" but insisting that when other people don't do so then they are stating things as absolute fact.
It's a classic drama-raising SOPT. I absolutely agree. Pep (I don't have to do it though because I am always right.  )
_____________________
Hypocrite lecteur, — mon semblable, — mon frère!
|
|
Sling Trebuchet
Deleted User
Join date: 20 Jan 2007
Posts: 4,548
|
05-20-2009 01:17
Hijacking acronyms!!!
For instance, everybody knows that SOPT originally means 'Same Old' Proxy Thread
_____________________
Maggie: We give our residents a lot of tools, to build, create, and manage their lands and objects. That flexibility also requires people to exercise judgment about when things should be used.
http://www.ace-exchange.com/home/story/BDVR/589
|
|
Pserendipity Daniels
Assume sarcasm as default
Join date: 21 Dec 2006
Posts: 8,839
|
05-20-2009 01:18
From: Sling Trebuchet Hijacking acronyms!!!
For instance, everybody knows that SOPT originally means 'Same Old' Proxy Thread People confusing acronyms with initialisms and abbreviations. Pep (I thought it was "Poxy"?)
_____________________
Hypocrite lecteur, — mon semblable, — mon frère!
|
|
Tegg Bode
FrootLoop Roo Overlord
Join date: 12 Jan 2007
Posts: 5,707
|
05-20-2009 01:39
From: Ponsonby Low
Ignored is the ACTUAL definition of cheating (in which rules or laws must be violated). Though the use of bots to increase traffic violated no rule or law or term of service for many years, it is claimed that it was ‘cheating’ throughout those years---simply because most people agree that Cheating is Bad. The impulse to connect a hated practice or situation with something widely considered Bad leads to disregard for the actual definition of the word being used to signify the Badness of the practice or situation. There's no specific rule or law against someone sleeping with another partner while married, so therefore it's not cheating 
_____________________
Level 38 Builder [Roo Clan]
Free Waterside & Roadside Vehicle Rez Platform, Desire (88, 17, 107)
Avatars & Roadside Seaview shops and vendorspace for rent, $2.00/prim/week, Desire (175,48,107)
|
|
Ian Nider
Seeds
Join date: 20 Mar 2009
Posts: 1,011
|
05-20-2009 01:57
From: Sling Trebuchet Ansver the qvestion!!
Or not.
Add to the list:
Not preceding each and every opinion with "in my opinion" but insisting that when other people don't do so then they are stating things as absolute fact.
It's a classic drama-raising SOPT. Oh fuck yes, I always say in my opinion so some twat won't have a nervous break down... stupid stupid stupid PC new-speak... I actually hate it, lol. |
|
ParisHilton Sideshow
Registered User
Join date: 29 Nov 2008
Posts: 4
|
05-20-2009 02:05
From: Ponsonby Low What are your top 3 most-despised SOPT (Same Old Putrid Tactics)?
1. “Da mihi factum, dabo tibi ius” - Give me the fact(s), I'll give you the law 2. "Usted tiene el derecho de guardar silencio/mantener silencio" - You have the right to remain silent. 3. "Lo que diga puede ser usado en su contra" - Anything you say may be used against you |
|
Kelli May
karmakanic
Join date: 7 Oct 2006
Posts: 1,135
|
05-20-2009 03:44
Not a tactic, but a habit. Reading a thread title and jumping to the end to make your comment, regardless of whether your answer has already been posted, debated to death and discredited, or is even relevant to the topic.
Exactly as I just did.
_____________________
Do worried sheep have nervous ticks?
Karmakanix@Sin-Labs http://slurl.com/secondlife/Circe/170/197/504
Karmakanix on SLX http://www.slexchange.com/modules.php?name=Marketplace&MerchantID=61062
|
|
Pserendipity Daniels
Assume sarcasm as default
Join date: 21 Dec 2006
Posts: 8,839
|
05-20-2009 05:00
From: Kelli May Not a tactic, but a habit. Reading a thread title and jumping to the end to make your comment, regardless of whether your answer has already been posted, debated to death and discredited, or is even relevant to the topic.
Exactly as I just did. Oh get with it! Someone said pretty much that in post #42. Pep (At least in this thread the title asks the question)
_____________________
Hypocrite lecteur, — mon semblable, — mon frère!
|
|
sable Valentine
AU United
Join date: 30 Apr 2006
Posts: 1,275
|
05-20-2009 06:07
From: Ian Nider Oh fuck yes, I always say in my opinion so some twat won't have a nervous break down... stupid stupid stupid PC new-speak... I actually hate it, lol. I would agree with this. |
|
Rime Wirsing
Color me gone
Join date: 31 Dec 2008
Posts: 345
|
05-20-2009 06:29
Google this
|
|
Dnali Anabuki
Still Crazy
Join date: 17 Oct 2006
Posts: 1,633
|
05-20-2009 07:05
The one I don't really understand is when someone has something happen to them personally and then decides its the end of civilization, democracy, personal freedom, creativity and SL and they are the only one who gets that.
And if you don't share their personal panic at having to change and adapt, you are on the side of the evil doers who would end civilization,democracy, personal freedom, creativity, and SL.
But still, I've learned alot from what people have said and how they say it in this forum. I had some pretty rigid unchallenged opinions when I first got into SL and seeing things from a different perspective has all been good for me.
I guess that is another one: if I don't like what you say, I can attack how you said it instead of the content.
This is an interesting topic to me, thanks for posting it.
_____________________
The price of apathy is to be ruled by evil men--Plato
|
|
Argent Stonecutter
Emergency Mustelid
Join date: 20 Sep 2005
Posts: 20,263
|
05-20-2009 07:12
From: Dnali Anabuki The one I don't really understand is when someone has something happen to them personally and then decides its the end of civilization, democracy, personal freedom, creativity and SL and they are the only one who gets that. The infamous "a conservative is a liberal who's been mugged" problem?  That's not "debating tactics", that's "being human". New converts or new parents, when it's you it's something that's never happened to anyone else in the world. It's hard for people to keep their perspective in times like that... you just have to ride it out and let them get over it. |
|
Nina Stepford
was lied to by LL
Join date: 26 Mar 2007
Posts: 3,373
|
05-20-2009 07:46
5. 'the allied lolcat distraction'
4. 'interpret every comment as absolute, to the point of absurdity'
3. 'circle the wagons and pull off topic'
2. 'ad hominem in the stead of reasoned argument'
1. 'straw man'
*i am mates with the admin so rules dont apply to me*
_____________________
SLU - ban em then bash em!
~~GREATEST HITS~~
pro-life? gtfo! slu- banning opposing opinions one at a time
http://www.sluniverse.com/php/vb/zomgwtfbbqgtfololcats/15428-disingenuous.html
learn to shut up and nod in agreement... or be banned!
http://www.sluniverse.com/php/vb/off-topic/1239-americans-not-stupid.html
|