Why Was My Climate Change Thread Locked? - Chess Forums - Page 13

AbyssalSludge · 2023-12-10T18:43:18-08:00

I'm sure nobody breached TOS, the thread received no warning, and the thread was locked without explanation.

Optimissed

3 hrs ago

0

#241

lfPatriotGames wrote:

Optimissed wrote:

playerafar wrote:

Optimissed wrote:

I would suggest perhaps not to get personal and make posts against people. It applies to both sides. Let's try to create good feeling.

I would agree that's usually a good idea.
But should one always be passive when some insist on terms like 'crackpot' and putting down people's education? And when they work together as a tag team.
And want 'sides'.
I suggest - each person could choose their policy as they see fit.
And will - if they so choose. And do. And then what happens happens.
Yes. 'create good feeling'.
And I think AB had/has a right to create a forum like this one and talk about why his forum was locked and others have a right to comment also. Rather than appease.

I don't mean appease so much as disengage. I fully understand what you're saying and I'm not being critical, so much as suggesting something. How about making this the alternative climate thread and seeing what happens?

There is already a topic about climate warming and one about climate cooling. Maybe there should be one about "climate just right".

I quite like it but it's redolent of complacency!!!!!

DiogenesDue

3 hrs ago

0

#242

playerafar wrote:

AG120502 wrote:

playerafar wrote:

Funny how 'D' and his two supporters claim this thread is 'dead' while D is very busy posting here.

I’m not sure whether you consider me a supporter of the aforementioned person, but for all intents and purposes, this thread ought to be left to die. It’s about a thread locked years ago, and I don’t see why it should be animated by activity like this. I see it as a waste of time. DD has different opinions, and consequently takes different actions.

Hi AG.
You did very very well to finally go against 'fester-"x" '
He acted like he'd been shot.
But if you truly want to be seen as neutral - then there's this thing about taking sides.
If you believe a particular person should never ever be criticized - who constantly insults other people - and you act like it - that's not doing much for your 'neutrality' nor your credibility.
But - and on the other hand - you're a much better poster than 'D'.
And not one single tear from you about being blocked in the 'global cooling' forum.
If you really are working for a more cordial atmosphere - you could publically say something to 'D' about him constantly complaining about being blocked there.
You don't seem to realize that constantly overlooking his offenses is appeasement and encourages him to continue or escalate.

Come up with your own arguments, please. You'd make a good Neville Chamberlain. All talk, no content...but thanks again for proving you read my posts.

You still don't get it, of course. I don't care that ExploringWA has blocked me personally. What else can he do...I have torn apart his arguments so many times he cannot afford to let me post there anyway. The problem is that he blocks *everyone* from the good science side of the debate, only leaving sycophants and apologists to oppose the garbage content there to make him look like he's winning an actual debate. Raise your hand, you're the top dog on that front...

The word is "publicly", by the way.

DiogenesDue

2 hrs ago

0

#243

Optimissed wrote:

playerafar wrote:

That's another common theme from 'D'.
Telling people what their motivations are.
Hoping to draw them into direct personal pingpong.
In the second person - with much use of the word 'you'.
He and his two supporters claiming this forum is 'dead' while he posts here heavily.
He can't change that now. Nor can they.
No matter how 'snarky' his retorts. Its too late.
Nor how very much he wants bottom post. Won't change it.
The forum is active and he's part of that activity.
----------------
Edit: there's another post by him just now. Didn't read it.
You mentioned 'trolling'.
A while back - 'D' directly and openly accused me of making a sockpuppet account after a person agreed with me about something.
A good poster was the first to call him out on that.
'D' was eventually forced to publically apologize - but then failed to concede he had been trolling.
There'll be another post by him now probably - but I don't need bottom post.

Har har you're not gonna get it this time.

But I like the fact you're answering back. Let's not let it become obsessive and let's ignore the intruder. Or it's back to square one.

You've got things backwards, as you often do. The intrusion, or rather disinterment, of this thread is the OP's, with Player rushing to jump on the bandwagon just as fast as his short legs could carry him...he'll never get over having his delusions of a Player-Diogenes-Elroch dream team being shattered, that chip on the shoulder is soldered in.

You, having a similar chip installed but for different reasons, also came running.

DiogenesDue

2 hrs ago

0

#244

AG120502 wrote:

playerafar wrote:

Funny how 'D' and his two supporters claim this thread is 'dead' while D is very busy posting here.

I’m not sure whether you consider me a supporter of the aforementioned person, but for all intents and purposes, this thread ought to be left to die. It’s about a thread locked years ago, and I don’t see why it should be animated by activity like this. I see it as a waste of time. DD has different opinions, and consequently takes different actions, as do the other posters.

Player considers anyone that does not attack me the way he does to be a full "supporter", and also assumes we talk strategy in private the way he and Optimissed are (hypocritically for Player) doing. It's quite laughable in its assumptions of his own importance and role.

DiogenesDue

2 hrs ago

0

#245

AG120502 wrote:

Go against Fester? When did I do anything resembling that?

...don't disturb the narrative in his head, he's spent so much time crafting and contorting it, after all.

DiogenesDue

2 hrs ago

0

#246

EndgameEnthusiast2357 wrote:

Jeez you sound like my mom sometimes, constantly obsessing over what you perceive as "character assassinations", and insisting everyone you ever interact with must have the exact accurate image of you. Let it go, it's not important what other people think about you. If you feel like you constantly have to correct other people's false perceptions of you, maybe you are the problem and you should figure out why people "mistakenly" say those things. Normal people don't care soo much about other people's opinions of them, with you it's become a narcissistic obsession. No one owes anyone a perfectly accurate character image. Anyone who incessantly whines "how dare someone say that about me that's so infuriating and wrong I better convince them how false that is" has serious mental issues and likely got off easy with whatever they said. Grow. Up. It doesn't matter people can say whatever they want.

Setting the record straight is not inherently "narcissistic" (of course). Your argument is not dissimilar to arguments made about Naroditsky and how people should take everything tossed their way with a smile.

You, Endgame, are the single worst example on the forums for making a statement like "grow up". You're a perpetual child. Stick with cars and Doordashing.

Optimissed

2 hrs ago

0

#247

DiogenesDue wrote:

AG120502 wrote:

playerafar wrote:

Funny how 'D' and his two supporters claim this thread is 'dead' while D is very busy posting here.

I’m not sure whether you consider me a supporter of the aforementioned person, but for all intents and purposes, this thread ought to be left to die. It’s about a thread locked years ago, and I don’t see why it should be animated by activity like this. I see it as a waste of time. DD has different opinions, and consequently takes different actions, as do the other posters.

Player considers anyone that does not attack me the way he does to be a full "supporter", and also assumes we talk strategy in private the way he and Optimissed are (hypocritically for Player) doing. It's quite laughable in its assumptions of his own importance and role.

I quite like the picture of player finally getting fed up of you and all of a sudden he's your number one target. He's actually controlling you and making you jump. You claim not to be but there you go again.

Optimissed

2 hrs ago

0

#248

You were never one to under-react. A -1 within the minute.

playerafar

2 hrs ago

0

#249

EndgameEnthusiast2357 wrote:

DiogenesDue wrote:

AG120502 wrote:

I’d like to ask posters here to cease posting on this thread and let it die. AbyssalSludge’s “climate change is a hoax” series of threads is also dead, and has been for years. It’s reasonable to conclude they won’t be coming back to life. The point is, this thread no longer serves a purpose. The last few pages have been forum ping-pong that is unnecessary and need not be continued. It’s devolved into endless arguments which seem unlikely to be resolved, and all concerned parties know they’re unlikely to change the views of others.

The thread is already dead. That will not prevent me from responded to falsehoods about me. Nor should any poster accept potshots without firing back, just because of some notion of maintaining "peace".

Appeasement leads to more liberties taken. See: Neville Chamberlain. As for nuances, there aren't any. A lot of teenagers make the mistake of saying things like that..."I didn't intend to be racist...I think all Asians are smart, for example...that's not racist", etc. It doesn't matter if his intent was not trolling, when that is exactly what his threads were for.

Jeez you sound like my mom sometimes, constantly obsessing over what you perceive as "character assassinations", and insisting everyone you ever interact with must have the exact accurate image of you. Let it go, it's not important what other people think about you. If you feel like you constantly have to correct other people's false perceptions of you, maybe you are the problem and you should figure out why people "mistakenly" say those things. Normal people don't care soo much about other people's opinions of them, with you it's become a narcissistic obsession. No one owes anyone a perfectly accurate character image. Anyone who incessantly whines "how dare someone say that about me that's so infuriating and wrong I better convince them how false that is" has serious mental issues and likely got off easy with whatever they said. Grow. Up. It doesn't matter people can say whatever they want.

Good post by EE there.
Showing he is not afraid of D - and D's imagninary authority.
Only two people seem to be afraid of D - month in month out.

playerafar

2 hrs ago

0

#250

AbyssalSludge wrote:

DiogenesDue wrote:

AbyssalSludge wrote:

It's funny how you believe to know my own motivations more than myself.

The title was not in 'all caps.' The title was not 'inflammatory,' nor was it trying to be (I made it quite clear that I was not okay with personal attacks). The thread was locked because of inflammatory comments and because it began to lean towards politics. Not because of the title.

...and yet, 3 threads with the same title were locked. Somehow, they all had different "inflammatory content" and got locked that had absolutely nothing to do with the same inflammatory title on each thread...how amazing.

Correlation does not equal causation.

If the title was the problem, my threads would not have gone on as long as they did. It certainly wouldn't warrant a lock (and in one case, a complete deletion). If the moderators had a problem with the title, all that would need to be done is for them to tell me to change it. But they didn't do that.

In fact, one of the moderators even commented on one of the threads saying he would be monitoring it to keep the debate in check. Not a single time was the title of the thread brought up. Why is that?

Maybe because the title wasn't the problem.

Hi AB.
The title is a red herring. A decoy. Is it completely irrelevant?
If this forum does get locked there is a very big range of options for a title of a next one.
Like: 'Protecting one's forums. The subject of how.'
Or: 'How to make forums about manmade climate change. Discussion.'
In other words the idea of not giving whoever a 'tactical opportunity'.
On a website of chessplayers will some want to make a forum 'verbal chess' with teams?
You know the answer.
There was a post here in August - and no postings here for three months.
Then I saw that you has posted yesterday - in post #179 - and then there was an immediate but failed attempt by three people to shut everyone up with two of those three silent as a plant pot about D's constant insulting of other posters.

DiogenesDue

1 hr ago

0

#251

Optimissed wrote:

I quite like the picture of player finally getting fed up of you and all of a sudden he's your number one target. He's actually controlling you and making you jump. You claim not to be but there you go again.

Again, logic escapes you. I didn't say anything to Player. He showed up all on his lonesome. Who's controlling who? You're both here now spouting your usual fare...but why? If the two of you could ever get over losing various engagements, you wouldn't have bothered posting here.

Neither of you is my "#1 target"...because I don't have a #1 target. I dispense with posters that behave like you indiscriminately, and neither of you is worth much other than as handy examples of how not to behave. Which is why "I get quiet" (Player's narrative) when you two are being relatively stable. When you aren't, I mirror your behavior back at you, if not your TOS violations, and you are summarily summoned and trapped. Not by me, but by your own insecurities and inadequacies...which are inexorable and unbreakable. Stronger than steel. I show you up, you hate me endlessly...you are incapable of more (proven out over the spans of many years), both fired in the same kiln.

DiogenesDue

11 min ago

0

#252

Optimissed wrote:

You were never one to under-react. A -1 within the minute.

I'm sure your -1s (and often more) come from any number of posters.