twooffour

skyjedi2005 said:

Had Lucas had his way this would have been in empire.

Leia "I Love You".

Han "Just remember that 'cause I'll be back"

Instead of the awesome "I Know"

I thought it was "I love you too"?

I-Pod instead of "PC, internet and music archive combined".

Or something like that...

Just FYI, this will continue as long as you keep it up.

I'm not gonna let more pieces of poorly thought-out, hypocritical, unjustified accusations thrown in my direction, just hang in the air. Rebuking them is just WAY too fun.

Either you follow up on your "noble" intentions, or you continue making provoking remarks (as it "doesn't count" if it's not a direct response) in threads like this - resulting in more... reactions.

I've never had a habit of bringing up old grudges on my own initiative, and I certainly ain't about to start.
So it's entirely up to you :p

CP3S said: 

but lazy moderation and preventing Frink's legitimate effort to get everyone to band together and starve the troll

In actuality, it's Frink's dishonest but hopefully effective effort to stop creating dirty nukes because of a few firecrackers.

But I already know for a fact that you'll never, ever comprehend this. It's quite impossible with your head up your own rectum, and believing in one's own rightness is so much easier with the ignore function on (the one in the head happily included) rather than making a solid case for it, time and time again.


Oh, am I being disrespectful here? Does my post smell like manure again? Well, as said previously - you rip what you sow, and you've just sown a new piece of undigested bullshit with the new few posts alone.

Don't dig through the cow manure, pal - there might be a mirror inside. Or a recording from a (futuristic) sowing supervision camera ;)

CP3S said:

Ah, I see what you are saying and I agree. I think most of us have twooffour on ignore now, and I haven't seen any replies to him in a while, and it feels very nice and peaceful.

Peaceful like the ostrich in the infamous metaphor.

It must feel nice to put it on ignore and continue tossing accusations of trolling, if you can pretend that no objections or rebuttals (and it's the latter case here, just in case you're wondering) have been put up.

It's a way of making an idiot out oneself, without realizing it.

And you won't get a shred of respect for this kind of behavior - no one gets to ride on the high horse and complain about cow manure all the time with huge bricks of shit coming out of one's own business end and slipping off the horse's back. You simply won't get away with it, so might as well stop trying.

CP3S said:

Bingowings said:

However sometimes what he post is stimulating, either as food for thought and further discussion or just as an example of how looney we all are.

I agree that he posts some fairly decent ideas from time to time, but he pads out those ideas with so much bullshit and manual pleasuring of himself, finding those decent ideas is a bit like digging through large heaps of reeking diarrhea to find bits of mediocre tasting (and now shit laced) chocolate.

Mind if I defend myself here?

I haven't seen you actually substantiate anything of the sort, a single time.
All the time it's just making empty claims about some sort of of "bullshit" in my posts, but I don't remember a single instance where you actually pointed it out and made a case.

Everytime you've tried, you've failed - be it when you accused me of selective cheering, or other instances of stubborness, hypocrisy or reading failure.
Last time I deconstructed one of those, what came? NOTHING. Not a line of defense or rebuttal, just silence and now the bold claims again. Sorry, doesn't work like that.

To use your metaphor, you don't get to accuse the other guy of throwing shit at you before checking whether it's shit or chocolate without much sugar in it (you know it's healthier), and if you throw a lot of shit at someone else, you should expect some of it to be attached to the chocolate he would otherwise throw in a clean state.

Furthermore, honestly what is the point of having someone bring decent ideas to the table, when they themselves are not willing to listen to the ideas of others?

The problem is the people who can't distinguish whether the other dude hasn't listened to their ideas, or has considered and rejected them, while MAKING A CASE FOR JUST THAT in the same post.

Especially when the vast majority of the time that person is just talking out of their ass.

Loudmouthed claims made without substantiation = worthless droppings that belong in the canalization.

I know it is trendy to come to the defense of things that are unpopular, but I think those coming to the defense of twooffour's behavior really need to take a moment to really think about whether or not his behavior really merits any defense.

When you're ready to do just that to make a case in the opposite direction, you can return to the pult and preach reason. So far, you shouldn't.

Read back over his old posts, the kid keeps his boxing gloves on at all times and is constantly chomping at the bit to use them. Not just sometimes, not just on a bad day, literally all the time.

Remember when I made a joke, and you put on the boxing gloves all of a sudden? And couldn't stop fighting even after learning that it was a joke?

Remember how you basically started this all (certainly between the two of us)?
That's what I'm talking about. This might be the 20th time I'm pointing out this hypocrisy to you - you haven't managed to address it properly one single time, as far as I remember, and you won't now.

Instead, you'll just say something about "not wanting to wade through the diarrhea", and proceed to spout how I'm the (only) dick around here.

And I deeply despise this kind of self-righteous dishonesty, which is why you'll see me throw a LOT of unadulterated diarrhea in your general direction if you keep this up.

Bingowings said:

When I read twooffour I read him as a self important, obsessive person who will pick any post to pieces even if it doesn't need to be.

Sometimes that's a good thing and it pretty much describes a large number of the people posting here, including myself.

It's my perception of his posting style and nine times out of ten I moderate my reaction based on that subjective reading of his style (which may not be anything to do with the actual person typing the words).

I think this sums it up pretty accurately.

Lots of the stuff I object to, doesn't really "need" any objections to be posted - there also are a lot of diplomatic, politically correct ways of getting across criticism of some perceived fallacy, than those I usually go with.
In most cases, people will rather listen to arguments said in a nice tone, because condescension and asperity are likely to activate defense mechanisms, and agreeing or complying begin to seem to come at a higher price.

But that's really all I do - I easily get annoyed by stupid arguments, especially in the context of argument or sweeping statements, and I mostly just tend to spout it out without any filtering.

I'm pretty sure I have no delusions about what subjects I actually know few things about, and which I don't (those I don't, you usually don't see me commenting on), and I've lost track of arguments often enough to know when I'm starting to fail.


Ok, I'm not outta this thread.

Bingowings said:

I think you know what I mean by idiom.

I know what it means normally, but I can't comprehend what it means here.
I often use "idioms" in my speech... I have no idea what "my idiom" is with regard to my posts.

If a lot of people take offense at how you say what you say it should be a sign for having a think about if they have a point and if they haven't just carry on.

 

You may not last long but at least you took the time to consider if they had a point.

Ah, yea, got it (I think you forgot a comma last time or something).

Well, as far as I'm concerned, I'm fine with people taking offense, or getting rubbed the wrong way, by someone acting sarcastic, or condescending, or arrogant.
I don't think much about political correctness if I find something stupid, so that's a welcome consequence.

However, if people decide to blow it up to the point that they declare someone a great enemy of the board, derail every second thread he posts in with personal attacks, and then start making "pledges" to make a stop to their obsessions,  then yes, it's definitely an over-reaction and I find it to be absurd, childish and laughable.

If, on top of that, they actually can't see the problems THEY'RE causing, fully convinced that the guy who expressed himself in a blunt way in some debate, is the sole source of the trouble... then it's becoming a circus.
Certainly not opposed to that, but don't mind if I mock and ridicule this nonsense at every opportunity.

In a way, I can sympathize with the defense mechanisms, though. It feels so much more comfortable to say "this guy is a troll and is causing trouble, let's turn away" than "this guy tends to be blunt about his opinions and we make a huge deal out of it every time, so let's grow up and stop".

I'm outta this thread.

TV's Frink said:

Bingowings said:

The pledge thread was silly

No, it was necessary.  And it seemed to be working.

If you've reached a point where making loud, hammy pledges regarding some internet guy you don't like (i.e. pledging to ignore him to prevent yourself from derailing threads) becomes a necessity, you know you've already long crossed the line of silliness.

Ziggy Stardust said:

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

I never really liked Palps delivery of that line.

Hey hey hey, hey hey, woah, woah, heyhey, woah!

Bingowings said:

If a large number of people post stuff against your chosen idiom

 

What does that mean?

and if you genuinely think they haven't carry on regardless and see how long you last.

CP3S said:

What the fuck? Away for a few hours and come back to find every other thread on lock down. Kind of excessive, isn't it? Off Topic is starting to look like FE or TF.n. 

Thanks to the (nice) lax moderation, we end up with a severe troll problem, then when Fink tries to deal with the troll problem we decide it is moderation time and moderate the hell out of his attempt. Meanwhile, yay, troll's still here!

How can "troll" be still here if there was never one in the first place?

Hey, CP, you seem like an intelligent fellow (whenever you keep out of pissing contests, that is ), so here's an idea:
Next time you read a joke about something, how about you don't respond with an aggressive insult post, and there won't be any trouble? Sounds reasonable?

Better than fueling flamewars first, and then pointing fingers at imaginary "trolls" when it gets too hot, it seems to me.
But maybe you have a different opinion about that ;)

CP3S said:

Moth3r said:

I got a PM from someone complaining about the bullshit going on in off-topic, I checked a few threads and saw a load of Frink vs twooffour, Warbler vs Davy, and decided it was time to lock a load of threads.

I don't have the time or the inclination to read and decide who is wrong or right, or who is a troll and who isn't.

Ah, so if enough people PM you regarding twooffour, might it yield results? You've already witnessed his MO first hand that time you had to temp ban him.

Hi. If Moth3r got those PMs and started to analyse all the posts from each side, chances are I still wouldn't get as much as a threat, without a good bunch of you getting a slice as well.
In some cases, maybe even a bigger one, should "fighting back" be considered a lesser offense than "derailing a thread with personal attacks by oneself".

So would that be a really good idea?
At any rate, maybe you should at least take a look at who's the "source of trouble" yourself, before sending any PMs. This way, chances are you'll emerge unscathed.


You know I make sense, so no need to reply to this ;)

I kinda like my post being the last one on that thread - makes for a good résumé ;)

Having that said, making a thread (or 6 threads) aimed against a specific user, is practically asking for trouble. Not that I'm saying it SHOULD be locked, but it seems to me if there's a line anywhere, this is it.

As for necessity, why not just start acting mature instead of announcing it loudly?

Mrebo said:

As far as telling the stormtroopers about the prison section, that was a clearly a ruse since 3PO already knew the stormtropers knew where Luke was and was pretending to be an imperial droid. But the basic point holds.

Ah, yea, got that mixed up apparently :)

Yea, seems like whatever line that could be potentially bad in the OT, is still salvaged (and then some) by either good delivery, or some degree of irony.

"That's not a moon. It's a space station." could easily come off as cheesy. I believe it's even on some "cheesiest movie quotes" video on Youtube.
But come on, that moment was just epic :)

Maybe when they're stuck in the garbage hole, and they hear a noise from under the water, and Han says "it IS worse", but then quickly replies to Luke's concern "yea, your imagination, kid".

Either a brilliant form of subtle characterization (he's grumpy and doesn't mind pointing out when things look bad, but at the same time wants to appear in control and above it all), or... a sloppy form of crude characterization (insert a grumpy line here, insert a hollywood skeptic line there).

His delivery makes me go for the former :)


EDIT: FORMER, FORMER... I meant FORMER! :D

All of 3P0's emotional reactions seem to be a bit distant and imitated, if you look closely.

He doesn't really mind telling the stormtroopers that the others went to the prison section (I think?); he kinda accepts serving under Jabba; he readily accepts "new masters" as soon as he's sold to someone else; he doesn't come off as terribly despaired after getting blown apart, and yes, he doesn't seem to be awfully sad about Han, either.
With all that, he obviously shows a lot of personality that could be described as annoyed, concerned, afraid, grumpy, self-centered, compliant, etc.

So why do we care about him? He still shows sympathetic traits (with all the unsympathetic ones being played for laughs), and basically entertains us with his personality (and the fact that it's coming from a robot).
I don't think there's any point in the three films where we truly care for C-3P0 in terms of his well-being or safety - we kinda know he'll get out of this, there is no real threat or fear involved, and he seems to be less involved in the situation than a human would be, too.

How that works? Suspension of disbelief, I guess.

Point is, I find the robot torture scene hilarious :D
Jabba's place is supposed to come off as dangerous and cynical, but at the same time quirky and amusing in dark way.
That torture scene fits that perfectly.

But that's just my perspective.

TV's Frink said:

"Those screams were way too fake" was a joke.  The fact that it was being tortured at all was the real problem.

Well there goes the pledge.

Torture is horrific and never amusing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHujwj6RBSM

Meh, as far as I'm concerned, droids in SW become persons when you've got to know them, but until that, they're more like toys.
Doubt anyone got misty-eyed over that "red one" getting asploded in ANH... that was more like "ah, some prop blew up".

C-3P0 didn't scream of pain when his arm got chopped off, and I'm pretty sure R2's "screams" were also just mere imitation and alarm signal.
So the torture scene came off as both kinda absurd and surreal to me - couldn't shake off the feeling that the fear, and pain, were all just "imitation" and not that real.

Maybe that's why I can laugh at it.

TV's Frink said:

That droid that was tortured in ROTJ.  Those screams were way too fake.

They were supposed to be comical.

mfastx said:

Well I realize that there are many movies where it doesn't matter if you already know what happens, but I just think (in my opinion) that if the prequels were made first, more people would have like them.

But the main issue of the prequels is the directing. George shouldn't have directed the prequels, if someone else would have directed them, they would have turned out better IMO.

Or... maybe less people, considering how TPM was one of the most wildly anticipated movies ever... because the OT were such classics ;)

Are we talking about the dialogue, or plot flaws (conveyed by dialogue)?

Because there's a lot that can be brought up in the latter category.
Hard to think of any in the former...

IBL

Warbler said:

TV's Frink said:

My advice...don't talk about it, and nothing will happen next.

Let's not get this thread locked too.

I didn't mean any offense by it.  

Well, are you sure, because he sounded very offended.

darth_ender said:

TV's Frink said:

darth_ender said:

I had this random thought...

...I can't help but wonder why this thread was created, when in reality this is exactly what virtually every other thread twooffour enters in the off topic forum turns into.

Fixed.

Seriously.  Most of the off-topic threads get a little silly but tend to stay at least marginally on-track.  Except when twooffour gets involved - and we have scientific proof in another thread that he's the one to blame, not everyone else.

It's nice to have that scientific proof of his influence, since "scientific proof" is what he appeals to in every argument or criticism anyway.

So if making polls among about 20 like-minded people counts as scientific proof to you... :p