a thread that was trolled badly

[神]

We categorise because it is the same.

If you have made it your reality to think in derogatory categories and simplifications, then that is pretty sad.

But you are not alone with it and just part of the masses. I am not acknowledging anyone for that kind of ideology.

Most people just are like that, because they can't help it in one way or the other.

[Gopher Gary]

What is up with the retarded categorizations on this forum?

I tried to reasonably explain something. Of course that must be categorized as "pseudo-intellectualising" because it conflicts with your own opinion.

And then the categorization of people into being like former members who I don't even know, which are more broadly categorized into socks, idiots, assholes, etc., with all the different an equally insulting nuances, like attention-whoring, asshatting and whatever ridiculous terms you use here frequently.

It is pretty easy to dismiss everything based on simplified stereotypes, except that it doesn't make any real sense at all. I mean, do you even converse outside of this board anymore and listen to how much sense this 'cognition jargon' still makes?

I am new here and my behavior makes if then no 'sense' because my social abilities are pretty crappy and I can't understand people well. Also I have certain compulsions, such as thinking rationally and being too honest. Of course I don't act as inadequate in my immediate social environment as I do here. But that is because I only do the things I know to be absolutely correct socially and act very very socially inhibited, that is never freely or natural like other people. I don't build real personal relationships. It is not healthy and it is part of my social problems, but the alternatives are obviously less functional.

The internet is a place where people are usually pretty aware of the implications of interacting through text messages, being always separated by computers with no real social aspects that aren't received if they don't choose to receive them. You can desist from reading a message, but you cannot not hear what you are told in reality. It is a lot more anonymous, more distant. Basically everything is voluntary. People talk more freely for that reason.

I am a social idiot, because I don't have any real knowledge about the inner mechanics of people, and I am not denying that. But I can think reasonable in the sense of thinking logically and coherent very well. That those two are not the same might be hard to grasp for some, especially for those who never developed a rational understanding of the things that intuitively work for them.


But is this an Asperger's/autism forum, or not? Is that not the primary issue that should be most tolerated here? How can you make the contrary the imperative?

I completely accept you for who you are, emo n00b, why are you so intolerant of me and my feelings? 

[神]

@Scary_Gary: I ignore you because you are like the manifestation of useless randomness and there is no basis of communication.

[Al Swearegen]

We categorise because it is the same.

If you have made it your reality to think in derogatory categories and simplifications, then that is pretty sad.

But you are not alone with it and just part of the masses. I am not acknowledging anyone for that kind of ideology.

Most people just are like that, because they can't help it in one way or the other.

I categorise you because your behaviours share commonalities that I have seen before on here. In the same way as you categorise Scary Gary
If you wanted to be seen as something a bit more credible and multidimensional, it is not up to me or others to un-categorise you or give you more slack or look after your feelings. You have to give us something more credible. You do want to own your actions and the impression you give right?

Everyone but you is not wrong, right?

Come on fail...give me something to laugh at....

[神]

I used a category for the purpose of describing an existing functional issue, which is that I cannot interact in any functional manner with people who only reply with (what appears to me as) random nonsensical statements.

You use categories in order to evaluate and dismiss someones opinion or person and apparently as an argument to base your logic upon.

Can you see the difference?

[RageBeoulve]

I used a category for the purpose of describing an existing functional issue, which is that I cannot interact in any functional manner with people who only reply with (what appears to me as) random nonsensical statements.

You use categories in order to evaluate and dismiss someones opinion or person and apparently as an argument to base your logic upon.

Can you see the difference?

I use categories to separate differing concepts or objects. You use categories divisively.

[神]

Ignoring Rage, let me take something apart here.

Let's make clear some facts about communication first. I think we must all agree that there are:

1. the different perceived realities of people
2. the message of each person he wants to communicate about those realities
3. the conclusions we draw about the messages we individually perceived
4. the decisions we make based on the understanding we gained by that

Fast-forward.......this kind of bullshit you spout, we have seen before. It is not new and you are not special or unique or different to this kind of discourse.

Your problem here is that you categorize what I write as bullshit prior to any coherent interpretation of the content. The category itself is your reality and argument to justify ignorance and not the content on which you base your categorization on.

We categorise because it is the same.

The problem is not that you categorize in order to express yourself or in order to order thought processes. The problem I see is that you have made the categories your reality and abandoned the reality the categories are supposed to be descriptive of. Essentially that is just being extremely superficial.

We say you post like Buttcoffee because you post like Buttcoffee.

How is that even relevant to anything. Why mention it in excess? Is it actually supposed to be some kind of argument, or just random facts about this forum? The only logic you can put that into considering your whole posts would be something like "Buttcoffee was just posting incoherent shit, therefore anyone posting like Buttcoffee is talking shit.". You see how that makes no sense and how it is irrelevant?

Now this type of pseudo-intellectualising sounds very much like the kind of asshattery that Buttcoffee used to try. He was a loser and intellectual lightweight of cringeworthy stature. I think you would have got on well with him and his emotional attention whoring drug-addled girlfriend, Eris.

We call it pseudo-intellectualising because it is bereft of actual intellect and does a poor imitation of putting across your ideas.

Again, you argue based on categorization, if you can call it an argument (which would be all about justifying your dismissal of any proper conversation and discussion ..). The fact is, you got the impression that my posts are stupid, but you do not name why and how or anything that would justify your opinion. Instead you talk about Buttcoffee. Hopefully not implying the "A sounds about like B, therefore A is effectively B" logic I previously mentioned... Pseudo-intellectualising is again derogatory, like much of the crap used here to insult people.

All you seem to do here is to justify one derogatory stereotype and insult with another. I begin to doubt that you are able to argue anything logically coherent anymore, that is actually based on an honest perception of reality, instead of superficial categories and simplifying ideas.

I drew a picture to illustrate your problem.

[神]

That's also what I meant by troll dynamics on this board. There is so much troll shit and anti-troll shit attempts here that it has all sunken to some degree of messed up nonsense of people trolling each other.

[P7PSP]

I'm new here and my behavior makes if then no 'sense' because my social abilities are pretty crappy and I can't understand people well. Also I have certain compulsions, such as thinking rationally and being too honest. Of course I don't act as inadequate in my immediate social environment as I do here. But that is because I only do the things I know to be absolutely correct socially and act very very socially inhibited, that is never freely or natural like other people. I don't build real personal relationships. It is not healthy and it is part of my social problems, but the alternatives are obviously less functional.

This rationalization is worthy of a Goldene Kamera nomination.  I can just imagine your lower lip wobbling and tears welling up in your eyes as you typed that post. 

I am a social idiot, because I don't have any real knowledge about the inner mechanics of people, and I am not denying that. But I can think reasonable in the sense of thinking logically and coherent very well. That those two are not the same might be hard to grasp for some, especially for those who never developed a rational understanding of the things that intuitively work for them.


But is this an Asperger's/autism forum, or not? Is that not the primary issue that should be most tolerated here? How can you make the contrary the imperative?

Ooh good one. The I'm asspie  and don't know better excuse has never been tried here before. 

[神]

I have effectively gained a large essential portion of my social skills by approximating what you can't say to people and what they like to talk about by trial-and-error in chat rooms and forums. But I still do not essentially understand why and there are too many nuances and uncertainties and exceptions. You can't just be avoidant of everything slightly uncertain socially, that's not very healthy or functional. It is also why you can't really argue that someone generally impaired "should have well know of X" in retrospective, because he probably knows everything but never anything well.

[ZEGH8578]

I can maek grafs tu :0

[P7PSP]

You can't just be avoidant of everything slightly uncertain socially, that's not very healthy or functional. It is also why you can't really argue that someone generally impaired "should have well know of X" in retrospective, because he probably knows everything but never anything well.

Actually I can and do argue that you protesting that you did not understand why Rage was perturbed about you asking DFG for nudes smells like bullshit.

Do you routinely step into traffic without looking down the street both ways?
Do you routinely touch hot stoves?
Just how befuddled are you in day to day life Princess?

[神]

@ZEGH8578:

That graphic would make perfect sense, if you ignored that this is not the Jesus club and the content here was already messed up pretty badly before I added my posts, which were meant to fit into the style of the forum (and pretty much of high interest because you would have been banned for them elsewhere).

Well, perfect sense in terms of the illustrated dynamics and not the literal the content.

[P7PSP]

The but, but, but defense does not work in this case because Zeg has been here long enough to observe the trolls that come here swinging their peckers around and being deliberately provocative. And he nailed it. That graph fits you perfectly Princess.

[TheoK]

The paradox is that he would actually have some points, if he were not trolling.