Total Posts:107|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Concern with the Weekly Stupid

Caploxion
Posts: 454
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2014 4:27:23 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
For the most part, the Weekly Stupid is an acceptable form of entertainment. Its core aim is to showcase stupid comments, and for Imabench to attack these stupid comments.

However, the 'Best of the Best' is a section that attributes stupidity to individual accounts, rather than simply attacking the stupid comments. The mentality is poor and dangerous for DDO, as it creates a hostile environment wherein ideas are not the only targets of attacks. It encourages senseless Ad Hominem, such as, 'Geo said this, therefore you know it's going to be stupid'.

If this attribution were abolished, we could see a far better Weekly Stupid that achieves its core aim without venturing into negative territory. I urge anyone reading this to consider the impact of that particular segment, and voice his/her opinion on the matter in a civil way.
"That's what people do. They breed, and then their children breed, and then their children do it, and their children do it. But, have you ever asked why we do it?" - Jim 'Metamorphhh' Crawford

"There is no doubt that life is given us, not to be enjoyed, but to be overcome; to be got over." - Arthur Schopenhauer

"It's like building a broken building, repairing it and then saying that now I have value in doing so...but it didn't need to be broken in the first place." -Gary 'Inmendham' Mosher
TUF
Posts: 21,310
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2014 4:38:52 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Ultimately, I think your arguments might best be served if addressed directly to airmax. You already know where the vast majority of the community stands on this, and in the end the only way something will change in this area is if Airmax decides for it too. Did he tell you to gather signatures though? I thought I remembered reading that, but can't quite remember.
"I've got to go and grab a shirt" ~ Airmax1227
Caploxion
Posts: 454
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2014 4:43:48 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/30/2014 4:38:52 AM, TUF wrote:
Ultimately, I think your arguments might best be served if addressed directly to airmax. You already know where the vast majority of the community stands on this, and in the end the only way something will change in this area is if Airmax decides for it too. Did he tell you to gather signatures though? I thought I remembered reading that, but can't quite remember.

Airmax said that he would do what the community wished, hence why I am posting here in hope of garnering support. Airmax did not yet tell me to gather signatures, although I think that is a great idea, thank you :)
"That's what people do. They breed, and then their children breed, and then their children do it, and their children do it. But, have you ever asked why we do it?" - Jim 'Metamorphhh' Crawford

"There is no doubt that life is given us, not to be enjoyed, but to be overcome; to be got over." - Arthur Schopenhauer

"It's like building a broken building, repairing it and then saying that now I have value in doing so...but it didn't need to be broken in the first place." -Gary 'Inmendham' Mosher
TUF
Posts: 21,310
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2014 4:58:48 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/30/2014 4:43:48 AM, Caploxion wrote:
At 1/30/2014 4:38:52 AM, TUF wrote:
Ultimately, I think your arguments might best be served if addressed directly to airmax. You already know where the vast majority of the community stands on this, and in the end the only way something will change in this area is if Airmax decides for it too. Did he tell you to gather signatures though? I thought I remembered reading that, but can't quite remember.

Airmax said that he would do what the community wished, hence why I am posting here in hope of garnering support. Airmax did not yet tell me to gather signatures, although I think that is a great idea, thank you :)

If this is the case, I reccomend responding to only the serious contenders, and compiling a list of those who agree with your motives. Though "the community" seems a little subjective, as undoubtedly this will cater to some, and not all.
"I've got to go and grab a shirt" ~ Airmax1227
Caploxion
Posts: 454
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2014 5:05:09 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/30/2014 4:58:48 AM, TUF wrote:
At 1/30/2014 4:43:48 AM, Caploxion wrote:
At 1/30/2014 4:38:52 AM, TUF wrote:
Ultimately, I think your arguments might best be served if addressed directly to airmax. You already know where the vast majority of the community stands on this, and in the end the only way something will change in this area is if Airmax decides for it too. Did he tell you to gather signatures though? I thought I remembered reading that, but can't quite remember.

Airmax said that he would do what the community wished, hence why I am posting here in hope of garnering support. Airmax did not yet tell me to gather signatures, although I think that is a great idea, thank you :)

If this is the case, I reccomend responding to only the serious contenders

I think I learned that lesson the hard way, despite your warnings :(

...and compiling a list of those who agree with your motives. Though "the community" seems a little subjective, as undoubtedly this will cater to some, and not all.

Is it not fair if the majority agree on rectification, then it should be passed? Or are you talking about a far closer split, say a 60/40? Would Airmax restrict the WS if a 60/40 positve consensus was reached?
"That's what people do. They breed, and then their children breed, and then their children do it, and their children do it. But, have you ever asked why we do it?" - Jim 'Metamorphhh' Crawford

"There is no doubt that life is given us, not to be enjoyed, but to be overcome; to be got over." - Arthur Schopenhauer

"It's like building a broken building, repairing it and then saying that now I have value in doing so...but it didn't need to be broken in the first place." -Gary 'Inmendham' Mosher
sdavio
Posts: 1,801
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2014 5:17:20 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/30/2014 4:27:23 AM, Caploxion wrote:
For the most part, the Weekly Stupid is an acceptable form of entertainment. Its core aim is to showcase stupid comments, and for Imabench to attack these stupid comments.

That isn't an acceptable core aim!
"Logic is the money of the mind." - Karl Marx
Caploxion
Posts: 454
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2014 5:20:20 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/30/2014 5:17:20 AM, sdavio wrote:
At 1/30/2014 4:27:23 AM, Caploxion wrote:
For the most part, the Weekly Stupid is an acceptable form of entertainment. Its core aim is to showcase stupid comments, and for Imabench to attack these stupid comments.

That isn't an acceptable core aim!

Why? I've said that it is acceptable; don't you agree with me?
"That's what people do. They breed, and then their children breed, and then their children do it, and their children do it. But, have you ever asked why we do it?" - Jim 'Metamorphhh' Crawford

"There is no doubt that life is given us, not to be enjoyed, but to be overcome; to be got over." - Arthur Schopenhauer

"It's like building a broken building, repairing it and then saying that now I have value in doing so...but it didn't need to be broken in the first place." -Gary 'Inmendham' Mosher
TUF
Posts: 21,310
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2014 5:21:07 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/30/2014 5:05:09 AM, Caploxion wrote:
At 1/30/2014 4:58:48 AM, TUF wrote:
At 1/30/2014 4:43:48 AM, Caploxion wrote:
At 1/30/2014 4:38:52 AM, TUF wrote:
Ultimately, I think your arguments might best be served if addressed directly to airmax. You already know where the vast majority of the community stands on this, and in the end the only way something will change in this area is if Airmax decides for it too. Did he tell you to gather signatures though? I thought I remembered reading that, but can't quite remember.

Airmax said that he would do what the community wished, hence why I am posting here in hope of garnering support. Airmax did not yet tell me to gather signatures, although I think that is a great idea, thank you :)

If this is the case, I reccomend responding to only the serious contenders

I think I learned that lesson the hard way, despite your warnings :(

We live and learn. Like I said, I have been there before too, though I never got the friendly warnings lol.

...and compiling a list of those who agree with your motives. Though "the community" seems a little subjective, as undoubtedly this will cater to some, and not all.

Is it not fair if the majority agree on rectification, then it should be passed?

That's how the democratic mind set seems to work. I am not sure if this website is moderated based on democracy; But I am led to believe that, based on what you said you were told by airmax.

Or are you talking about a far closer split, say a 60/40? Would Airmax restrict the WS if a 60/40 positve consensus was reached?

That is not for me to say. You are going to have to PM him on that one. The idea behind the list would be just to gather a generalized idea of how many are behind the idea, and how many are against. So far, previously heated discussions may have cluttered the threads true intent. I am suggesting just posting a list of people who are in support of it, and who are against it so a better determination can be drawn of where the community stands as a whole. But like I said, I don't know if airmax will make the determination based on numbers alone or not.
"I've got to go and grab a shirt" ~ Airmax1227
sdavio
Posts: 1,801
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2014 5:33:13 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/30/2014 5:20:20 AM, Caploxion wrote:
At 1/30/2014 5:17:20 AM, sdavio wrote:
At 1/30/2014 4:27:23 AM, Caploxion wrote:
For the most part, the Weekly Stupid is an acceptable form of entertainment. Its core aim is to showcase stupid comments, and for Imabench to attack these stupid comments.

That isn't an acceptable core aim!

Why? I've said that it is acceptable; don't you agree with me?

Not at all. The whole idea that people will be less likely to be illogical for fear of being attacked on youtube is ridiculous, as if people would be spurred to creative new ideas out of that. The goal should be, not to 'stamp out stupidity', but to promote intelligence.
"Logic is the money of the mind." - Karl Marx
Caploxion
Posts: 454
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2014 5:46:36 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/30/2014 5:21:07 AM, TUF wrote:
At 1/30/2014 5:05:09 AM, Caploxion wrote:
At 1/30/2014 4:58:48 AM, TUF wrote:
At 1/30/2014 4:43:48 AM, Caploxion wrote:
At 1/30/2014 4:38:52 AM, TUF wrote:
Ultimately, I think your arguments might best be served if addressed directly to airmax. You already know where the vast majority of the community stands on this, and in the end the only way something will change in this area is if Airmax decides for it too. Did he tell you to gather signatures though? I thought I remembered reading that, but can't quite remember.

Airmax said that he would do what the community wished, hence why I am posting here in hope of garnering support. Airmax did not yet tell me to gather signatures, although I think that is a great idea, thank you :)

If this is the case, I reccomend responding to only the serious contenders

I think I learned that lesson the hard way, despite your warnings :(

We live and learn. Like I said, I have been there before too, though I never got the friendly warnings lol.

You've been through this too on DDO?


...and compiling a list of those who agree with your motives. Though "the community" seems a little subjective, as undoubtedly this will cater to some, and not all.

Is it not fair if the majority agree on rectification, then it should be passed?

That's how the democratic mind set seems to work. I am not sure if this website is moderated based on democracy; But I am led to believe that, based on what you said you were told by airmax.

Yes, Airmax seems to have a democratic model in mind, at least in regards to his moderation of macro issues.


Or are you talking about a far closer split, say a 60/40? Would Airmax restrict the WS if a 60/40 positve consensus was reached?

That is not for me to say. You are going to have to PM him on that one. The idea behind the list would be just to gather a generalized idea of how many are behind the idea, and how many are against. So far, previously heated discussions may have cluttered the threads true intent. I am suggesting just posting a list of people who are in support of it, and who are against it so a better determination can be drawn of where the community stands as a whole. But like I said, I don't know if airmax will make the determination based on numbers alone or not.

So a list to avoid inane, heated discussion? I think I need more support, and that can come through forum discussion. I don't think there is a way around the forums in regards to this.
"That's what people do. They breed, and then their children breed, and then their children do it, and their children do it. But, have you ever asked why we do it?" - Jim 'Metamorphhh' Crawford

"There is no doubt that life is given us, not to be enjoyed, but to be overcome; to be got over." - Arthur Schopenhauer

"It's like building a broken building, repairing it and then saying that now I have value in doing so...but it didn't need to be broken in the first place." -Gary 'Inmendham' Mosher
Caploxion
Posts: 454
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2014 5:52:28 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/30/2014 5:33:13 AM, sdavio wrote:
At 1/30/2014 5:20:20 AM, Caploxion wrote:
At 1/30/2014 5:17:20 AM, sdavio wrote:
At 1/30/2014 4:27:23 AM, Caploxion wrote:
For the most part, the Weekly Stupid is an acceptable form of entertainment. Its core aim is to showcase stupid comments, and for Imabench to attack these stupid comments.

That isn't an acceptable core aim!

Why? I've said that it is acceptable; don't you agree with me?

Not at all. The whole idea that people will be less likely to be illogical for fear of being attacked on youtube is ridiculous, as if people would be spurred to creative new ideas out of that. The goal should be, not to 'stamp out stupidity', but to promote intelligence.

I'm not about promoting logical, intelligent comments, although those things would be a treat from the usual DDO silliness. I'm about stopping the untoward attacks, personal attacks to be precise.

As for the core aim, whilst not ideal, as you propose, I would argue that it is still acceptable.
"That's what people do. They breed, and then their children breed, and then their children do it, and their children do it. But, have you ever asked why we do it?" - Jim 'Metamorphhh' Crawford

"There is no doubt that life is given us, not to be enjoyed, but to be overcome; to be got over." - Arthur Schopenhauer

"It's like building a broken building, repairing it and then saying that now I have value in doing so...but it didn't need to be broken in the first place." -Gary 'Inmendham' Mosher
TUF
Posts: 21,310
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2014 6:22:17 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/30/2014 5:46:36 AM, Caploxion wrote:
At 1/30/2014 5:21:07 AM, TUF wrote:
At 1/30/2014 5:05:09 AM, Caploxion wrote:
At 1/30/2014 4:58:48 AM, TUF wrote:
At 1/30/2014 4:43:48 AM, Caploxion wrote:
At 1/30/2014 4:38:52 AM, TUF wrote:
Ultimately, I think your arguments might best be served if addressed directly to airmax. You already know where the vast majority of the community stands on this, and in the end the only way something will change in this area is if Airmax decides for it too. Did he tell you to gather signatures though? I thought I remembered reading that, but can't quite remember.

Airmax said that he would do what the community wished, hence why I am posting here in hope of garnering support. Airmax did not yet tell me to gather signatures, although I think that is a great idea, thank you :)

If this is the case, I reccomend responding to only the serious contenders

I think I learned that lesson the hard way, despite your warnings :(

We live and learn. Like I said, I have been there before too, though I never got the friendly warnings lol.

You've been through this too on DDO?

Yes. Different situation, but handled the same way.


...and compiling a list of those who agree with your motives. Though "the community" seems a little subjective, as undoubtedly this will cater to some, and not all.

Is it not fair if the majority agree on rectification, then it should be passed?

That's how the democratic mind set seems to work. I am not sure if this website is moderated based on democracy; But I am led to believe that, based on what you said you were told by airmax.

Yes, Airmax seems to have a democratic model in mind, at least in regards to his moderation of macro issues.


Or are you talking about a far closer split, say a 60/40? Would Airmax restrict the WS if a 60/40 positve consensus was reached?

That is not for me to say. You are going to have to PM him on that one. The idea behind the list would be just to gather a generalized idea of how many are behind the idea, and how many are against. So far, previously heated discussions may have cluttered the threads true intent. I am suggesting just posting a list of people who are in support of it, and who are against it so a better determination can be drawn of where the community stands as a whole. But like I said, I don't know if airmax will make the determination based on numbers alone or not.

So a list to avoid inane, heated discussion? I think I need more support, and that can come through forum discussion. I don't think there is a way around the forums in regards to this.

A list and discussion can work hand in hand. You can post a list while still addressing purely logical sustaining rebuttals to this as a method to convince rather than coerce.
"I've got to go and grab a shirt" ~ Airmax1227
Caploxion
Posts: 454
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2014 6:31:43 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/30/2014 6:22:17 AM, TUF wrote:
At 1/30/2014 5:46:36 AM, Caploxion wrote:
At 1/30/2014 5:21:07 AM, TUF wrote:
At 1/30/2014 5:05:09 AM, Caploxion wrote:
At 1/30/2014 4:58:48 AM, TUF wrote:
At 1/30/2014 4:43:48 AM, Caploxion wrote:
At 1/30/2014 4:38:52 AM, TUF wrote:
Ultimately, I think your arguments might best be served if addressed directly to airmax. You already know where the vast majority of the community stands on this, and in the end the only way something will change in this area is if Airmax decides for it too. Did he tell you to gather signatures though? I thought I remembered reading that, but can't quite remember.

Airmax said that he would do what the community wished, hence why I am posting here in hope of garnering support. Airmax did not yet tell me to gather signatures, although I think that is a great idea, thank you :)

If this is the case, I reccomend responding to only the serious contenders

I think I learned that lesson the hard way, despite your warnings :(

We live and learn. Like I said, I have been there before too, though I never got the friendly warnings lol.

You've been through this too on DDO?

Yes. Different situation, but handled the same way.


...and compiling a list of those who agree with your motives. Though "the community" seems a little subjective, as undoubtedly this will cater to some, and not all.

Is it not fair if the majority agree on rectification, then it should be passed?

That's how the democratic mind set seems to work. I am not sure if this website is moderated based on democracy; But I am led to believe that, based on what you said you were told by airmax.

Yes, Airmax seems to have a democratic model in mind, at least in regards to his moderation of macro issues.


Or are you talking about a far closer split, say a 60/40? Would Airmax restrict the WS if a 60/40 positve consensus was reached?

That is not for me to say. You are going to have to PM him on that one. The idea behind the list would be just to gather a generalized idea of how many are behind the idea, and how many are against. So far, previously heated discussions may have cluttered the threads true intent. I am suggesting just posting a list of people who are in support of it, and who are against it so a better determination can be drawn of where the community stands as a whole. But like I said, I don't know if airmax will make the determination based on numbers alone or not.

So a list to avoid inane, heated discussion? I think I need more support, and that can come through forum discussion. I don't think there is a way around the forums in regards to this.

A list and discussion can work hand in hand. You can post a list while still addressing purely logical sustaining rebuttals to this as a method to convince rather than coerce.

Of course, my disagreement alone isn't going to coerce people! I've always tried to convince people, even if I lost my temper on the occasion.
"That's what people do. They breed, and then their children breed, and then their children do it, and their children do it. But, have you ever asked why we do it?" - Jim 'Metamorphhh' Crawford

"There is no doubt that life is given us, not to be enjoyed, but to be overcome; to be got over." - Arthur Schopenhauer

"It's like building a broken building, repairing it and then saying that now I have value in doing so...but it didn't need to be broken in the first place." -Gary 'Inmendham' Mosher
sdavio
Posts: 1,801
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2014 7:11:14 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/30/2014 5:52:28 AM, Caploxion wrote:
At 1/30/2014 5:33:13 AM, sdavio wrote:
At 1/30/2014 5:20:20 AM, Caploxion wrote:
At 1/30/2014 5:17:20 AM, sdavio wrote:
At 1/30/2014 4:27:23 AM, Caploxion wrote:
For the most part, the Weekly Stupid is an acceptable form of entertainment. Its core aim is to showcase stupid comments, and for Imabench to attack these stupid comments.

That isn't an acceptable core aim!

Why? I've said that it is acceptable; don't you agree with me?

Not at all. The whole idea that people will be less likely to be illogical for fear of being attacked on youtube is ridiculous, as if people would be spurred to creative new ideas out of that. The goal should be, not to 'stamp out stupidity', but to promote intelligence.

I'm not about promoting logical, intelligent comments, although those things would be a treat from the usual DDO silliness. I'm about stopping the untoward attacks, personal attacks to be precise.

I would argue that the former is the only means to achieve the latter.

As for the core aim, whilst not ideal, as you propose, I would argue that it is still acceptable.

Acceptable for what?
"Logic is the money of the mind." - Karl Marx
Caploxion
Posts: 454
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2014 7:25:03 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/30/2014 7:11:14 AM, sdavio wrote:
At 1/30/2014 5:52:28 AM, Caploxion wrote:
At 1/30/2014 5:33:13 AM, sdavio wrote:
At 1/30/2014 5:20:20 AM, Caploxion wrote:
At 1/30/2014 5:17:20 AM, sdavio wrote:
At 1/30/2014 4:27:23 AM, Caploxion wrote:
For the most part, the Weekly Stupid is an acceptable form of entertainment. Its core aim is to showcase stupid comments, and for Imabench to attack these stupid comments.

That isn't an acceptable core aim!

Why? I've said that it is acceptable; don't you agree with me?

Not at all. The whole idea that people will be less likely to be illogical for fear of being attacked on youtube is ridiculous, as if people would be spurred to creative new ideas out of that. The goal should be, not to 'stamp out stupidity', but to promote intelligence.

I'm not about promoting logical, intelligent comments, although those things would be a treat from the usual DDO silliness. I'm about stopping the untoward attacks, personal attacks to be precise.

I would argue that the former is the only means to achieve the latter.

This is what I meant by untoward: could you not have a scenario wherein the comments attacked, and not the people making the comments? I mean, shouldn't people have the right to criticise what other people say?


As for the core aim, whilst not ideal, as you propose, I would argue that it is still acceptable.

Acceptable for what?

Acceptable for public conduct in terms of appropriate behaviour.
"That's what people do. They breed, and then their children breed, and then their children do it, and their children do it. But, have you ever asked why we do it?" - Jim 'Metamorphhh' Crawford

"There is no doubt that life is given us, not to be enjoyed, but to be overcome; to be got over." - Arthur Schopenhauer

"It's like building a broken building, repairing it and then saying that now I have value in doing so...but it didn't need to be broken in the first place." -Gary 'Inmendham' Mosher
sdavio
Posts: 1,801
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2014 7:41:45 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/30/2014 7:25:03 AM, Caploxion wrote:
This is what I meant by untoward: could you not have a scenario wherein the comments attacked, and not the people making the comments? I mean, shouldn't people have the right to criticise what other people say?

The difference is between the reasons for doing so. Imabench literally makes a 'show' out of it. The object is not the good ideas which we get to once the bad ideas are 'moved out of the way'. The focus is to wallow in the bad. It's, above all, a boring way to view the world.
"Logic is the money of the mind." - Karl Marx
imabench
Posts: 21,230
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2014 11:37:17 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/30/2014 4:27:23 AM, Caploxion wrote:
For the most part, the Weekly Stupid is an acceptable form of entertainment. Its core aim is to showcase stupid comments, and for Imabench to attack these stupid comments.

However, the 'Best of the Best' is a section that attributes stupidity to individual accounts, rather than simply attacking the stupid comments. The mentality is poor and dangerous for DDO,

You know what else is poor and dangerous for DDO? Calling gay people the f word.....

as it creates a hostile environment wherein ideas are not the only targets of attacks. It encourages senseless Ad Hominem, such as, 'Geo said this, therefore you know it's going to be stupid'.

If this attribution were abolished, we could see a far better Weekly Stupid that achieves its core aim without venturing into negative territory. I urge anyone reading this to consider the impact of that particular segment, and voice his/her opinion on the matter in a civil way.

Once again, nobody on here cares about what you think....
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2014 12:15:07 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/30/2014 4:27:23 AM, Caploxion wrote:
For the most part, the Weekly Stupid is an acceptable form of entertainment. Its core aim is to showcase stupid comments, and for Imabench to attack these stupid comments.

However, the 'Best of the Best' is a section that attributes stupidity to individual accounts, rather than simply attacking the stupid comments. The mentality is poor and dangerous for DDO, as it creates a hostile environment wherein ideas are not the only targets of attacks. It encourages senseless Ad Hominem, such as, 'Geo said this, therefore you know it's going to be stupid'.

If this attribution were abolished, we could see a far better Weekly Stupid that achieves its core aim without venturing into negative territory. I urge anyone reading this to consider the impact of that particular segment, and voice his/her opinion on the matter in a civil way.

There are a few issues here. At present, though, there's one that takes precedence IMHO, over the discussion over whether BoTB is good or rational or what-have-you.

I think it would be wise to remember that, while bench is a fixture at DDO, he is not an administrator of DDO.

TWS is something bench does, entirely on his own. It's his show. He is the producer, the director, the writer, and the owner. It is not an "official" DDO anything.

There is no "network" to complain to with TWS, except perhaps "Bench productions" or "the Bench Channel" (Benchomundo? Bench News? Bench Broadcasting Company? B.E.T.?).

Bench is the sole person who can make the call to change his show. He clearly is uninterested in doing so. Youtube could prevent the show from being posted, but 1, then it's Youtube you'd be wanting to talk to and 2, there ARE other sites that host videos. DDO, however, has some direct intervention ability relating to him as a DDO user.

And to be clear: You could make your own "better" show. Any of us could in theory. And if nobody watched, bench might lose interest. But in the meantime, you are, unfortunately, at an impasse.

So, to sum up:

1, We have a thing in the show you don't like.
2, He won't change it.

This leads to the question: What, specifically, are you advocating for, then?

Are you advocating for the administration of this site to use the leverage they have to try to force him to change it by, say, refusing to allow him to post the link to it in the Misc section? AFAIK, nothing in the link he posts violates any conduct, and it links externally where folks know it's not DDO. Undoubtedly you know by this point that the show DOES have its fans. I don't think you're going to convince its fans not to like it--they like it, it's a subjective assessment (which is not to say no preference can ever be changed through discussion, but is to say that clearly in this case it seems to be unlikely).

If the administration did step in, do you think that would, should, or could stop bench from continuing the show through administrative measures HERE due to his actions THERE? DDO shouldn't really be, in my opinion, in the business of assessing your behavior on OTHER websites...Youtube is not DDO. What bench says there is not what he says here, and his behavior there is subject to the culture and rules THERE, not to the ones here. There are, of course, limitations to this position. But do you think this meets the same criteria for intervention as, say, directly threatening another user?

While, in general, I can understand a petition like this, phrased like this... at this point I think it would be helpful, considering how much discussion has gone on, to be more specific in what your goal is. You could want to change anything about the show, even a spelling error, and bench can feel free to ignore it, because there's no obligation for him to be rational, or fair (It's worked for Bill O'Reilly! parum pum pssh). So what's the goal or endgame, here? What do you want to be done that can be accomplished?
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2014 12:17:00 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/30/2014 12:15:07 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
AFAIK, nothing in the link he posts violates any conduct, and it links externally where folks know it's not DDO.

Poor phrasing. Meant to say:

"AFAIK, nothing in the post he makes which includes the links violates any rules, and the content he links to links externally, where folks know it's not DDO".
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
DudeStop
Posts: 1,278
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2014 12:54:07 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/30/2014 4:27:23 AM, Caploxion wrote:
For the most part, the Weekly Stupid is an acceptable form of entertainment. Its core aim is to showcase stupid comments, and for Imabench to attack these stupid comments.

Or say he's super lazy.
However, the 'Best of the Best' is a section that attributes stupidity to individual accounts, rather than simply attacking the stupid comments. The mentality is poor and dangerous for DDO, as it creates a hostile environment wherein ideas are not the only targets of attacks. It encourages senseless Ad Hominem, such as, 'Geo said this, therefore you know it's going to be stupid'.

Ah, senseless ad hominem. Did this ever ring a bell to you?
If this attribution were abolished, we could see a far better Weekly Stupid that achieves its core aim without venturing into negative territory. I urge anyone reading this to consider the impact of that particular segment, and voice his/her opinion on the matter in a civil way,

Something you need to learn.
orangemayhem
Posts: 333
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2014 1:34:58 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/30/2014 4:27:23 AM, Caploxion wrote:
For the most part, the Weekly Stupid is an acceptable form of entertainment. Its core aim is to showcase stupid comments, and for Imabench to attack these stupid comments.

However, the 'Best of the Best' is a section that attributes stupidity to individual accounts, rather than simply attacking the stupid comments. The mentality is poor and dangerous for DDO, as it creates a hostile environment wherein ideas are not the only targets of attacks. It encourages senseless Ad Hominem, such as, 'Geo said this, therefore you know it's going to be stupid'.

If this attribution were abolished, we could see a far better Weekly Stupid that achieves its core aim without venturing into negative territory. I urge anyone reading this to consider the impact of that particular segment, and voice his/her opinion on the matter in a civil way.

I love the climbdown every time you make one of these. First it was 'Ban the Weekly Stupid'. Then it was 'Reform the Weekly Stupid'. Now it's 'Concern with the Weekly Stupid'. I'm awaiting the day when you simply make a forum saying 'I acknowledge the Weekly Stupid', and we all look around bemusedly as if that were a point in itself.
I'm back (ish).
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2014 1:50:55 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/30/2014 5:33:13 AM, sdavio wrote:
At 1/30/2014 5:20:20 AM, Caploxion wrote:
At 1/30/2014 5:17:20 AM, sdavio wrote:
At 1/30/2014 4:27:23 AM, Caploxion wrote:
For the most part, the Weekly Stupid is an acceptable form of entertainment. Its core aim is to showcase stupid comments, and for Imabench to attack these stupid comments.

That isn't an acceptable core aim!

Why? I've said that it is acceptable; don't you agree with me?

Not at all. The whole idea that people will be less likely to be illogical for fear of being attacked on youtube is ridiculous, as if people would be spurred to creative new ideas out of that. The goal should be, not to 'stamp out stupidity', but to promote intelligence.

It's made me rethink a few posts before.

Besides, it's good punishment to people who's stupidity can't be ignored... Like Nummi's.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
Caploxion
Posts: 454
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2014 3:09:09 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/30/2014 11:37:17 AM, imabench wrote:
At 1/30/2014 4:27:23 AM, Caploxion wrote:
For the most part, the Weekly Stupid is an acceptable form of entertainment. Its core aim is to showcase stupid comments, and for Imabench to attack these stupid comments.

However, the 'Best of the Best' is a section that attributes stupidity to individual accounts, rather than simply attacking the stupid comments. The mentality is poor and dangerous for DDO,

You know what else is poor and dangerous for DDO? Calling gay people the f word.....

as it creates a hostile environment wherein ideas are not the only targets of attacks. It encourages senseless Ad Hominem, such as, 'Geo said this, therefore you know it's going to be stupid'.

If this attribution were abolished, we could see a far better Weekly Stupid that achieves its core aim without venturing into negative territory. I urge anyone reading this to consider the impact of that particular segment, and voice his/her opinion on the matter in a civil way.

Once again, nobody on here cares about what you think....

kfc
"That's what people do. They breed, and then their children breed, and then their children do it, and their children do it. But, have you ever asked why we do it?" - Jim 'Metamorphhh' Crawford

"There is no doubt that life is given us, not to be enjoyed, but to be overcome; to be got over." - Arthur Schopenhauer

"It's like building a broken building, repairing it and then saying that now I have value in doing so...but it didn't need to be broken in the first place." -Gary 'Inmendham' Mosher
imabench
Posts: 21,230
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2014 3:13:00 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/30/2014 1:34:58 PM, orangemayhem wrote:

I love the climbdown every time you make one of these. First it was 'Ban the Weekly Stupid'. Then it was 'Reform the Weekly Stupid'. Now it's 'Concern with the Weekly Stupid'.

To me it looks like desperate pandering to try to find support for a cause that anybody with more then 6 brain cells can see is hopeless....

I'm awaiting the day when you simply make a forum saying 'I acknowledge the Weekly Stupid', and we all look around bemusedly as if that were a point in itself.
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
Caploxion
Posts: 454
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2014 3:28:48 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/30/2014 12:15:07 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 1/30/2014 4:27:23 AM, Caploxion wrote:
For the most part, the Weekly Stupid is an acceptable form of entertainment. Its core aim is to showcase stupid comments, and for Imabench to attack these stupid comments.

However, the 'Best of the Best' is a section that attributes stupidity to individual accounts, rather than simply attacking the stupid comments. The mentality is poor and dangerous for DDO, as it creates a hostile environment wherein ideas are not the only targets of attacks. It encourages senseless Ad Hominem, such as, 'Geo said this, therefore you know it's going to be stupid'.

If this attribution were abolished, we could see a far better Weekly Stupid that achieves its core aim without venturing into negative territory. I urge anyone reading this to consider the impact of that particular segment, and voice his/her opinion on the matter in a civil way.

There are a few issues here. At present, though, there's one that takes precedence IMHO, over the discussion over whether BoTB is good or rational or what-have-you.

I think it would be wise to remember that, while bench is a fixture at DDO, he is not an administrator of DDO.

TWS is something bench does, entirely on his own. It's his show. He is the producer, the director, the writer, and the owner. It is not an "official" DDO anything.

There is no "network" to complain to with TWS, except perhaps "Bench productions" or "the Bench Channel" (Benchomundo? Bench News? Bench Broadcasting Company? B.E.T.?).

Bench is the sole person who can make the call to change his show. He clearly is uninterested in doing so. Youtube could prevent the show from being posted, but 1, then it's Youtube you'd be wanting to talk to and 2, there ARE other sites that host videos. DDO, however, has some direct intervention ability relating to him as a DDO user.

And to be clear: You could make your own "better" show. Any of us could in theory. And if nobody watched, bench might lose interest. But in the meantime, you are, unfortunately, at an impasse.

So, to sum up:

1, We have a thing in the show you don't like.
2, He won't change it.


This leads to the question: What, specifically, are you advocating for, then?

That he not be not allowed to link the show via DDO if it contains unacceptable content.


Are you advocating for the administration of this site to use the leverage they have to try to force him to change it by, say, refusing to allow him to post the link to it in the Misc section?

Yes, exactly.

AFAIK, nothing in the link he posts violates any conduct, and it links externally where folks know it's not DDO. Undoubtedly you know by this point that the show DOES have its fans. I don't think you're going to convince its fans not to like it--they like it, it's a subjective assessment (which is not to say no preference can ever be changed through discussion, but is to say that clearly in this case it seems to be unlikely).

Should it not be a majority vote? Sure, the show has fans, but what if the fans are outnumbered by the detractors 20/80? I only have to convince the majority, not everyone, right?


If the administration did step in, do you think that would, should, or could stop bench from continuing the show through administrative measures HERE due to his actions THERE? DDO shouldn't really be, in my opinion, in the business of assessing your behavior on OTHER websites...Youtube is not DDO.

Yes, DDO shouldn't be stopping him from posting on another site. However, DDO can stop him from posting links on here.

What bench says there is not what he says here, and his behavior there is subject to the culture and rules THERE, not to the ones here. There are, of course, limitations to this position. But do you think this meets the same criteria for intervention as, say, directly threatening another user?

The WS, in my opinion, is clearly not as bad as directly threatening people. I think that he should be asked to revise his show, if he want to continue to post here, rather than warranting an outright ban (as would result from a direct threat).


While, in general, I can understand a petition like this, phrased like this... at this point I think it would be helpful, considering how much discussion has gone on, to be more specific in what your goal is. You could want to change anything about the show, even a spelling error, and bench can feel free to ignore it, because there's no obligation for him to be rational, or fair (It's worked for Bill O'Reilly! parum pum pssh). So what's the goal or endgame, here? What do you want to be done that can be accomplished?

I want him to change the Best of the Best segment so that it is not as hostile towards members.
"That's what people do. They breed, and then their children breed, and then their children do it, and their children do it. But, have you ever asked why we do it?" - Jim 'Metamorphhh' Crawford

"There is no doubt that life is given us, not to be enjoyed, but to be overcome; to be got over." - Arthur Schopenhauer

"It's like building a broken building, repairing it and then saying that now I have value in doing so...but it didn't need to be broken in the first place." -Gary 'Inmendham' Mosher
Caploxion
Posts: 454
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2014 3:32:44 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/30/2014 1:34:58 PM, orangemayhem wrote:
At 1/30/2014 4:27:23 AM, Caploxion wrote:
For the most part, the Weekly Stupid is an acceptable form of entertainment. Its core aim is to showcase stupid comments, and for Imabench to attack these stupid comments.

However, the 'Best of the Best' is a section that attributes stupidity to individual accounts, rather than simply attacking the stupid comments. The mentality is poor and dangerous for DDO, as it creates a hostile environment wherein ideas are not the only targets of attacks. It encourages senseless Ad Hominem, such as, 'Geo said this, therefore you know it's going to be stupid'.

If this attribution were abolished, we could see a far better Weekly Stupid that achieves its core aim without venturing into negative territory. I urge anyone reading this to consider the impact of that particular segment, and voice his/her opinion on the matter in a civil way.

I love the climbdown every time you make one of these. First it was 'Ban the Weekly Stupid'. Then it was 'Reform the Weekly Stupid'. Now it's 'Concern with the Weekly Stupid'. I'm awaiting the day when you simply make a forum saying 'I acknowledge the Weekly Stupid', and we all look around bemusedly as if that were a point in itself.

Ignoring your slippery slope argument, I can now see that my original arguments for banning the Weekly Stupid weren't entirely rational, hence the lessening criticism. Is my current proposal not rational?
"That's what people do. They breed, and then their children breed, and then their children do it, and their children do it. But, have you ever asked why we do it?" - Jim 'Metamorphhh' Crawford

"There is no doubt that life is given us, not to be enjoyed, but to be overcome; to be got over." - Arthur Schopenhauer

"It's like building a broken building, repairing it and then saying that now I have value in doing so...but it didn't need to be broken in the first place." -Gary 'Inmendham' Mosher
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2014 3:34:54 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/30/2014 7:41:45 AM, sdavio wrote:
At 1/30/2014 7:25:03 AM, Caploxion wrote:
This is what I meant by untoward: could you not have a scenario wherein the comments attacked, and not the people making the comments? I mean, shouldn't people have the right to criticise what other people say?

The difference is between the reasons for doing so. Imabench literally makes a 'show' out of it. The object is not the good ideas which we get to once the bad ideas are 'moved out of the way'. The focus is to wallow in the bad. It's, above all, a boring way to view the world.

At 1/30/2014 7:11:14 AM, sdavio wrote:
At 1/30/2014 5:52:28 AM, Caploxion wrote:

I'm not about promoting logical, intelligent comments, although those things would be a treat from the usual DDO silliness. I'm about stopping the untoward attacks, personal attacks to be precise.

I would argue that the former is the only means to achieve the latter.

I agree with all of the above. Regardless of the warranted criticism, I'm not sure if such an outlook is enough to warrant outright banning of the show.

I think there is a way to make the show entertaining without it being blatantly hateful. Exactly how is up to the host of the show to implement. If it continues to hate upon members not deserving of hate (and I would probably only attribute trolls being actually deserving of hate, which is what they love of course), I would probably support a ban of some sort.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
imabench
Posts: 21,230
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2014 3:41:20 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/30/2014 3:28:48 PM, Caploxion wrote:

Should it not be a majority vote? Sure, the show has fans, but what if the fans are outnumbered by the detractors 20/80?

You really are a stubborn dingus if you think that 80% of people could be against the show when all of your criticisms of the show up to this point have been met with overwhelming and almost universal disapproval....

The WS, in my opinion, is clearly not as bad as directly threatening people. I think that he should be asked to revise his show,

I have been asked, and I promptly ignored them.

I want him to change the Best of the Best segment so that it is not as hostile towards members.

And again, I am going to ignore it.

I can now see that my original arguments for banning the Weekly Stupid weren't entirely rational, hence the lessening criticism. Is my current proposal not rational?

Not even a bit
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
dtaylor971
Posts: 1,907
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2014 3:47:49 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/30/2014 3:41:20 PM, imabench wrote:
At 1/30/2014 3:28:48 PM, Caploxion wrote:

Should it not be a majority vote? Sure, the show has fans, but what if the fans are outnumbered by the detractors 20/80?

You really are a stubborn dingus if you think that 80% of people could be against the show when all of your criticisms of the show up to this point have been met with overwhelming and almost universal disapproval....

The WS, in my opinion, is clearly not as bad as directly threatening people. I think that he should be asked to revise his show,

I have been asked, and I promptly ignored them.

I want him to change the Best of the Best segment so that it is not as hostile towards members.

And again, I am going to ignore it.

I can now see that my original arguments for banning the Weekly Stupid weren't entirely rational, hence the lessening criticism. Is my current proposal not rational?

: Not even a bit

Caplaxion... Give it up...
"I don't know why gays want to marry, I have spent the last 25 years wishing I wasn't allowed to." -Sadolite