How to inflame

Aficionados allowing awful allusions ..aforesaid ants antisocial ?

Ants ain't.

This is fun. Now, let's start with the letter b and drive everyone mad. 

Are you trying to be funny?

Affable assuredly !

Although all attenuation attributably aimable at always amiable artfizz acclaiming afire.

I'll make this post here because the other thread in which I made it disappeared completely. Maybe they destroyed the troll's account, who knows. In any case I spent some time writing this, and it ought to exist on this site; the "how to inflame" thread, while differing, is not all that off the mark from what I have to say.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

It kills me, it really does, how vulnerable this community is to elementary trolls. It's astounding really - whereas most of the sites I frequent wouldn't even have given such an obviously facetious post the time of day, sure enough a glut of chess.com's contingency type frantically away, regarding OP (which equates to original, not opening, poster, by the way) as if he or she was so excessively sincere and also genuine... gosh, I'm astounded by the gross gullibility I've seen demonstrated.

Most online communities not only have such incisive instincts as to detect these things without proof, even after this poster was already proven to be a plagarist by NM Ozzie idiots continued to gratify this completely incredulous topic header (I might end my life if I don't achieve X rating... the most obviously hyperbolic and dubious title ever) with "sincere" posts. Which is simply ludicrous.

How naive a community, how easily confused and dumbfounded do you people insist on being? Such an extreme example: wherein not only has the OP been proven to have demonstratably plagiarized another post for the sole purpose of trolling, but followed up with a similarly idiotic thread, AND STILL some of you internet infants respond as if you're addressing a real cry for help. Please stop embarrassing yourselves. Have some sense. Cultivate an iota of critical faculty. Assume everything you encounter on the internet is by default dubious. Nurture a healthy skepticism. Restrain your knee jerk reaction - first test the text you encounter with even the slightest of common sense.

Such obvious, simplistic and effortless trolls should have zero shelf-life in a vigilant community. Frankly, I'm baffled by how gullible and naive many of these responses prove this community to be.

I know chess.com attracts people from all walks of life, who perhaps, due to youth or old age, cannot be expected to be internet savvy. Still: the lack of reflective consideration - even the minutest indulgence of which could've set off alarm bells - causes me to be absolutely disappointed in what ought to be a sophisticated conglomerate.

Instead you show that you're easily infiltrated by even the most obvious and overt trolling.

Please, please, do the entire community a favour by familiarizing yourself with standard techniques and being healthily skeptical before indulging a clearly inflammatory post.

I would love to see this community raise the collective bar to the normative standard of the rest of the internet, instead of being some kind of online kiddy-pool, susceptible to whatever shticks are long over-used elsewhere, but because of the all-encompassing naivety of the chess.com crowd, it still works here.

Please, let's have some self respect. Think before you post. Reflect, formulate, calculate - everything you're already used to doing in a chess game. This is why I can't forgivingly dismiss the idea that we should be good at this - we're chess players, paranoid by nature and analytical out of necessity. You should be the last group who falls consistently for blatant trolls.

In any case, pull up your proverbial pants. Stop being far too easy. Chess.com should not have the reputation of being a troll's paradise, wherein the whole community nonsensically glazes their eyes over and responds without the slightest consideration of skepticism. It's shameful, it's embarrassing, and it's moronically recurring; too many of you consistently give credence to trollish posts mature communities would never indulge in the slightest.

Let me apologize openly to you here, Rae1. Looks like they're taking 'trolling' seriously here. Yes, the plagiarism thing was bad - I was treating his second post on its own 'merits' (although that might be the totally wrong word to use ). 

@Rae1 - thank you for setting me straight - this is all so beneath me - I promise - I'll change

Oy vey. Another perfectly good thread shot to ribbons.

Having threads in which people claim they're going to kill themselves disappear is clearly sensible. Where they were trollish, that is an added bonus.

I wonder what percentage of chess.com members actually believe Stephen Colbert is a right wing nut?

My opinion is that life is a game.    If we can't have fun, what is the point?  If everybody was the same how boring would that be?  I try to accept and understand everyone and I think that might be my problem.  There are some things that just are beyond understanding.

Not me. I have no idea who he is.

Why does toast always land butter-side-down, for instance.

Well, duh, that's Murphy's Law...that's not a difficult question at all!

I have actually experienced toast landing butter side up. I must be blessed. But I haven't been keeping track of this statistically. I will start doing that right away.

Another important question, "Is my morning coffee almost gone or have I had enough?"

I'm not sure that attaching a label to something counts as an explanation - particularly as this is probably the wrong label.

On the other hand, you do have support from a British Ig Nobel laureate for your point of view.

Indeed. There's a deal of solid science and scientific research behind this phenomenon e.g. http://www.cockeyed.com/science/toast/toast1.html

and this:

 Ig Nobel Physics Prize 
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
 Briton Dr Robert Matthews of Aston University for the observation that toast does usually fall buttered-side down.

 In Tumbling Toast, Murphy's Law And The Fundamental Constants, published in the European Journal of Physics, he demonstrated that a slice of toast teethering on the edge of a plate or table is likely to land with the buttered side on the floor.  The reason is that the spin of the toast is enough only for the slice to perform a half-somersault by the time it lands.  The toast was simulated by a piece of wood with B, for butter, daubed on one side.

Indeed. There's a deal of solid science and scientific research behind this phenomenon e.g. http://www.cockeyed.com/science/toast/toast1.html

This was an outstanding web article and I would love to see more science being performed by this highly skilled team of investigators.

As for that theory about the half-turn-toast-timing? Obviously an opinion corrupted by knowledge of the laws of physics and reasonable thinking. Bah!

Most own results will not be readily available since I am not usually a buttered toast eater and only prepare buttered toast quarterly, and the number of times I accidentally drop the toast is infrequent since I prefer to use a non-slippery paper towel as transportation system for the buttered toast to my station at my PC. That's because if I use a plate I will have to wash it. And besides it just takes up space on my desk which would be better utilized by opened chess books.