Any Dancarlin Forum April 1st stunts?

[Montegriffo]

Ah, the bullshit ''but they did it too'' response.
Also works in the ''but Hillary'' or ''but Obama'' versions.

Also works in the playground where it belongs.

[StCapps]

Ah, the bullshit ''but they did it too'' response.
Also works in the ''but Hillary'' or ''but Obama'' versions.

Also works in the playground where it belongs.

Not only did y'all do it too, y'all instigated it and now you are putting all the blame on the other side. Like a bunch of pussies. If you can't handle the heat, stay out of the kitchen, don't bitch about the heat like a whinny little bitch and blame everyone else in the kitchen for causing the heat. That's what you, Kath and ooky are doing, you created a self fulfilling prophecy by forcing the other side to defend itself from your bad faith posting and then claim they started the bad faith posting after you provoked that response. That is the lengths you faggots will go to play the victim around here, it's really sad.

[BjornP]

]The very people they blame for strawmanning them got strawmanned by them far more often than vice versa. So why hasn't those on the right left the forum yet despite that? Because they aren't pussies. If Kath wanted to stop being strawmanned than she should have stopped strawmanning every single person who disagreed with her as being a Trump nuthugger, but she refuses to stop that bullshit. If you tell her she's doing this and she used to far less reactionary, then she ignores and lumps you in as "one of them".

The left stopped arguing in good faith long before we started making fun of them for it on a routine basis because they've gotten so bad. They did this to themselves, Bjorn. They love throwing rocks from their glass house, but they hate it if you throw the rocks back. They've simply gotten lazy and blame everyone else for it.

Absolute nonsense, Capps. Setting aside that Kath is not Kath AND ooky and Monte, none of them strawman to the level, extent and amount that someone like StA does or did at the DCF. It's like trying to paint North Korean and American abuses of power on a 1:1 scale because both countries have cases of corruption or comparing having your head chopped off for apostasy with American death penalty. Fake news, fake history. And as for Kath, she told the forum several times that she was voting for Trump. Several of you, including you Capps, was way more enamored with Trump than you are now. Total election pro-Trump partisanship from you back then. You can pretend that you were neutral and objective all you like to anybody else, and it's easy now that the DCF got closed post-election and now that you're more critical of Trump, but I do remember how absolutely anything Trump did was a "masterstroke", or actually that Trump was really, really clever, and how he was really gonna "drain the swamp" and all that BS... as opposed to the clueless sock puppet that he's looking like now and that I anticipated he would be.

Who cares about "The" Left? We're discussing this place and Kath, ooky, trech Monte and whoever else either left or thought of leaving. Think of people as individuals , Capps. StA, Okee, you, Smitty, boe, Atanamis, etc. are not "The Right" to me. 90% of the time, I don't consider myself to be debating "the Right" when I am having a discussion with you. If I did, I might make the same mistake over and over again that someone like StA keeps making: Guilt by association. And when you're lousy at making associations, and if you cannot percieve individuals as individuals, your assigning of guilt will always be off. I'll make a guilt by association fallacy or strawmanning myself once or twice, everyone does, but not in nearly every single post, and not as a deliberate tactic where I keep repeating a strawmanning lie over and over and over again to win the argument.

And it's that that gets tiring for people, and if you landed in a SJW dominated forum where everything you said kept getting spun as "racist", "Fascist", or "Islamophobic" or whatever ways those people will try and shut down a discussion, you would eventually get tired of that shit. Doesn't mean you would, or should, quit the forum. Simply that the feeling of your attempts at honestly debating with people who employ strawmanning and guilt by association tactics wouldn't just be a feeling of there not being an honest, rational debate. That's what the objective facts would be.

The problem people who left made, to my speculation anyway, was assign too much.... I suppose authority or maybe informal ownership over the forum, to people like StA and his consistently dishonest debating tactics and posting volume. They may see the forum as being dominated by Sta, Okee, Silvereagle, etc. as one "clique". While not seeing people like GCF, jbird, adwinistrator, Otern, Penner, DrY, myself, etc. as a counterweight to the voices. And squarely in the middle, the non-Trumpian centrist, Martin Hash. And none of us really being 100% "Left" or "Right".

People sometimes pay more attention to the negatives than the positives. If I thought that this was truly an echo chamber of only people with diametrically opposed opinions, and only populated by StA clones, then I wouldn't have stuck around for all these years, either.

[Martin Hash]

Damn, Bjorn. That's quite an in-depth analysis. Very intuitive.

Debating should be entertaining to lurkers as a sport. Exerything you said was eerily true but still falls within the scope of entertainment. (StA does the things you say but his insight on some matters is brilliantly entertaining.) I want to point out how DB smashes through those kind of tactics. There just needs to be one guy doing that and it makes the tricksters honest. Maybe he'll hang around more, but if not, you sure have the chops for it: sheriff BjornP.

[StCapps]

Absolute nonsense, Capps. Setting aside that Kath is not Kath AND ooky and Monte, none of them strawman to the level, extent and amount that someone like StA does or did at the DCF. It's like trying to paint North Korean and American abuses of power on a 1:1 scale because both countries have cases of corruption or comparing having your head chopped off for apostasy with American death penalty. Fake news, fake history.

False. Kath and monte and are the forums premiere strawman artists these days, that might not have been true back in the day, but now they are at the top of the heap.

And as for Kath, she told the forum several times that she was voting for Trump. Several of you, including you Capps, was way more enamored with Trump than you are now. Total election pro-Trump partisanship from you back then. You can pretend that you were neutral and objective all you like to anybody else, and it's easy now that the DCF got closed post-election and now that you're more critical of Trump, but I do remember how absolutely anything Trump did was a "masterstroke", or actually that Trump was really, really clever, and how he was really gonna "drain the swamp" and all that BS... as opposed to the clueless sock puppet that he's looking like now and that I anticipated he would be.

Strawman. Total partisanship from me because I shot down many of this boards more ridiculous premature criticisms of Trump? That's what Kath and monte thought too, and it's why they are acting like complete assholes who argue in bad faith, because they think it's just a justified reaction to us doing the same, but it's all in your heads. They've become ridiculously reactionary in response to this faulty perception that the board a pro-Trump echo chamber, but that is nonsense and so is your claim that anyone on this forum thought Trump can do no wrong, at any point during the election cycle.

It is not an act to claim that I was never in the bag for Trump, if you thought I was, it's because of your faulty perception, not reality.

Who cares about "The" Left? We're discussing this place and Kath, ooky, trech Monte and whoever else either left or thought of leaving. Think of people as individuals , Capps. StA, Okee, you, Smitty, boe, Atanamis, etc. are not "The Right" to me. 90% of the time, I don't consider myself to be debating "the Right" when I am having a discussion with you. If I did, I might make the same mistake over and over again that someone like StA keeps making: Guilt by association. And when you're lousy at making associations, and if you cannot percieve individuals as individuals, your assigning of guilt will always be off. I'll make a guilt by association fallacy or strawmanning myself once or twice, everyone does, but not in nearly every single post, and not as a deliberate tactic where I keep repeating a strawmanning lie over and over and over again to win the argument.

Kath and monte use more guilt by association bullshit than StA does. You do it too apparently, anyone who didn't shit all over Trump before a situation warranted it, they all got lumped in as Trump nuthuggers to lazy fucks who complain about forum being a bubble.

How about those who think this forum is a pro-Trump bubble look in the mirror instead blaming others for problems that they caused?

And it's that that gets tiring for people, and if you landed in a SJW dominated forum where everything you said kept getting spun as "racist", "Fascist", or "Islamophobic" or whatever ways those people will try and shut down a discussion, you would eventually get tired of that shit. Doesn't mean you would, or should, quit the forum. Simply that the feeling of your attempts at honestly debating with people who employ strawmanning and guilt by association tactics wouldn't just be a feeling of there not being an honest, rational debate. That's what the objective facts would be.

The forum seems closer to an SJW dominated echo chamber than it does a Trump echo chamber, not that it's anywhere close to either. I hear way more claims of racism and fascism than claims that Trump can do no wrong. This forum actually has a lot of diverse opinions, not that Kath and monte would notice, they are too busy ignoring that so they can hold onto the delusion that this is really just a pro-Trump echo chamber.

The problem people who left made, to my speculation anyway, was assign too much.... I suppose authority or maybe informal ownership over the forum, to people like StA and his consistently dishonest debating tactics and posting volume. They may see the forum as being dominated by Sta, Okee, Silvereagle, etc. as one "clique". While not seeing people like GCF, jbird, adwinistrator, Otern, Penner, DrY, myself, etc. as a counterweight to the voices. And squarely in the middle, the non-Trumpian centrist, Martin Hash. And none of us really being 100% "Left" or "Right".

There is plenty of balance around here, they just want to pretend it's them against the world. Our "clique" does not front like this forum is filled with pro-Clinton sychophants because not everyone agrees with them, yet the other side plays victim and claims we are all pro-Trump sychophants if we don't agree with them. Fuck their victim mentality, they are just a bunch of pussies decrying the very argument tactics that they use the most.

People sometimes pay more attention to the negatives than the positives. If I thought that this was truly an echo chamber of only people with diametrically opposed opinions, and only populated by StA clones, then I wouldn't have stuck around for all these years, either.

You can see the forest from the trees, and so can the supposed StA clones. The only "clique" who can't see the forest from the trees are those who think any praise of Trump is an indication that the person praising him is his fanboy and this an echo chamber filled with such folks trying to shut down the conversation.

I am calling them out on this delusional belief, the rest of forum doesn't need to be called out on this because they aren't retarded, but these fuck heads need to be singled out.

[BjornP]

False. Kath and monte and are the forums premiere strawman artists these days, that might not have been true back in the day, but now they are at the top of the heap.

Fake news. So fake you're embarrassing yourself.

Strawman. Total partisanship from me because I shot down many of this boards more ridiculous premature criticisms of Trump? That's what Kath and monte thought too, and it's why they are acting like complete assholes who argue in bad faith, because they think it's just a justified reaction to us doing the same, but it's all in your heads. They've become ridiculously reactionary in response to this faulty perception that the board a pro-Trump echo chamber, but that is nonsense and so is your claim that anyone on this forum thought Trump can do no wrong, at any point during the election cycle.

It is not an act to claim that I was never in the bag for Trump, if you thought I was, it's because of your faulty perception, not reality.

The board was never pro-Trump. A small cadre of the most active and prolific posters were, to variying degrees. Some simply for Trump in an "anything but Hillary" way. They've become "reactionary"? I thought they were leftists?

Is it possible that my perception of your posts was...faulty? Sure. Ok. Let's say that that was true. After all, unless you're just saving face, you would know best your own thoughts, right? Soooo... by that logic, what makes my perspective and reading of your views faulty, and your perspective of monte and Kath's views not faulty?

Kath and monte use more guilt by association bullshit than StA does. You do it too apparently, anyone who didn't shit all over Trump before a situation warranted it, they all got lumped in as Trump nuthuggers to lazy fucks who complain about forum being a bubble.

How about those who think this forum is a pro-Trump bubble look in the mirror instead blaming others for problems that they caused?

Again, embarrasing fake news. Monte and Kath use nothing near the same levels of guilt by association as StA. And being pro-Trump and debating using strawman is not the same thing, and I never made the claim it was. StA uses strawmen in all sorts of discussions, against pretty much anyone on the opposite side of his argument. Those who disagree with him the most (or post their disagreements with him the most), just recieve more strawmen posts from him than those who don't.

The forum seems closer to an SJW dominated echo chamber...

Oh, that I definitely agree with these days. But I've also had to expand on the definition of SJW in recent times.

.... than it does a Trump echo chamber, not that it's anywhere close to either. I hear way more claims of racism and fascism than claims that Trump can do no wrong. This forum actually has a lot of diverse opinions, not that Kath and monte would notice, they are too busy ignoring that so they can hold onto the delusion that this is really just a pro-Trump echo chamber.

The illusion's wearing off now, so it's nothing at all as pro-Trump as it was just a few months ago. And I agree with you that it has alot of diverse opinion, as I posted earlier about only noticing the negative. Or as we say here: Empty barrels make the most noise. It can feed the illusion that you're numerically outmatched if your opponent(s) simply post alot more.

There is plenty of balance around here, they just want to pretend it's them against the world. Our "clique" does not front like this forum is filled with pro-Clinton sychophants because not everyone agrees with them, yet the other side plays victim and claims we are all pro-Trump sychophants if we don't agree with them. Fuck their victim mentality, they are just a bunch of pussies decrying the very argument tactics that they use the most.

People who have criticized Trump haven't been accused of all being suckers of the "MSM fake news" every time these supposedly always-lying "fake news" reported a bad story about him?

I have made it quite open on several occasions who I consider the greatest, victim mentality pussies of this forum (StA, Okee and SilverEagle). I consider it nothing more than a coincidence that they are pro-Trumpers. They suffer from a cultural disease that I wish they cure themselves of, not a political one. Between Kath and Monte, Monte is the one more likely to find sympathy with some of the common causes of the "diversity"-loving leftists. I'd place Kath politically closest to Martin Hash, tbh. She's just vocal in her dislike.

You can see the forest from the trees, and so can the supposed StA clones. The only "clique" who can't see the forest from the trees are those who think any praise of Trump is an indication that the person praising him is his fanboy and this an echo chamber filled with such folks trying to shut down the conversation.

I am calling them out on this delusional belief, the rest of forum doesn't need to be called out on this because they aren't retarded, but these fuck heads need to be singled out.

Look, people can choose to stay or leave this place. I think it's a mistake to leave this place for the same reason Martin points out (and thanks for kind words, Martin): Somebody's got to keep them honest. I don't think anyone has said or indicated that any praise of Trump = being a fanboy. Not enough people to call it a clique, I'm sure.

[Speaker to Animals]

Only a supreme faggot throws around accusations like that without substantive proof.

The butthurt people I encounter on this forum are upset Trump won, upset they can no longer bully or censor their way into being the only voices heard, and threaten to run off to the liberal forums where opposing views are safely banned so they don't get exposed.

[Martin Hash]

(Dude, you're doing it again.)

[StCapps]

The board was never pro-Trump. A small cadre of the most active and prolific posters were, to variying degrees. Some simply for Trump in an "anything but Hillary" way. They've become "reactionary"? I thought they were leftists?

Reactionaries are not exclusive to one side of the political spectrum.

Is it possible that my perception of your posts was...faulty? Sure. Ok. Let's say that that was true. After all, unless you're just saving face, you would know best your own thoughts, right? Soooo... by that logic, what makes my perspective and reading of your views faulty, and your perspective of monte and Kath's views not faulty?

Because I don't lump them in as Hillary supporters just because I don't agree with them, yet they lump me in as a Trump supporter because I don't agree with them. I don't jump to crazy conclusions about their beliefs, but they sure are out to paint me as a Trump sychopant so they can write off my criticisms of their worst anti-Trump arguments. I'm probably wrong here and there about them, they couldn't be more off the mark about me if they tried.

Again, embarrasing fake news. Monte and Kath use nothing near the same levels of guilt by association as StA. And being pro-Trump and debating using strawman is not the same thing, and I never made the claim it was. StA uses strawmen in all sorts of discussions, against pretty much anyone on the opposite side of his argument. Those who disagree with him the most (or post their disagreements with him the most), just recieve more strawmen posts from him than those who don't.

StA resorts to strawmen most often after he is being strawmanned. Most of the time he's retaliating, if you want him to strawman you less often than I suggest y'all stop strawmanning him at every turn.

The illusion's wearing off now, so it's nothing at all as pro-Trump as it was just a few months ago. And I agree with you that it has alot of diverse opinion, as I posted earlier about only noticing the negative. Or as we say here: Empty barrels make the most noise. It can feed the illusion that you're numerically outmatched if your opponent(s) simply post alot more.

The delusion isn't wearing off though. Kath and monte think we are Trump sycophants who just recently had our bubble burst but couldn't see any fault in him prior, and that was never even close to true at any point on this forum.

People who have criticized Trump haven't been accused of all being suckers of the "MSM fake news" every time these supposedly always-lying "fake news" reported a bad story about him?

For the most part, no. People usually get called out for being suckers for MSM fake news when it is warranted. The most pro-Trump people on this forum have criticized him repeatedly and they usually don't get called out for doing so because they pick their battles a whole lot more wisely than those who hate on Trump the most. That is the big difference.

I have made it quite open on several occasions who I consider the greatest, victim mentality pussies of this forum (StA, Okee and SilverEagle). I consider it nothing more than a coincidence that they are pro-Trumpers. They suffer from a cultural disease that I wish they cure themselves of, not a political one. Between Kath and Monte, Monte is the one more likely to find sympathy with some of the common causes of the "diversity"-loving leftists. I'd place Kath politically closest to Martin Hash, tbh. She's just vocal in her dislike.

Nah monte, Kath and ooky are the biggest victim mentality pussies on this forum and I consider it nothing more than a coincidence that they are anti-Trumpers. StA, Okee and SilverEagle can't hold a candle to those three.

Look, people can choose to stay or leave this place. I think it's a mistake to leave this place for the same reason Martin points out (and thanks for kind words, Martin): Somebody's got to keep them honest. I don't think anyone has said or indicated that any praise of Trump = being a fanboy. Not enough people to call it a clique, I'm sure.

Oh it's full blown clique, Kath, montegriffo, ooky, grumpycatface, penner, etc.
They honestly think the only reason anyone would find fault with their criticisms of Trump is because they are his sycophants, if they weren't his sycophants than they would be applauding their worst arguments against Trump instead of defending him for such nonsense. It's fucking ridiculous and they strawman the other clique far more often than that clique they rail against strawman's them. You might not see it, but this is the reality.

The two biggest differences between the cliques on the topic of Trump is:
- The Pro-Trump side tends to pick their battles wisely, and the Anti-Trump side tends to pick their battles poorly
- The Pro-Trump side doesn't play victim when they are outnumbered in an argument, and the Anti-Trump side does play victim when they are outnumbered in an argument

[Montegriffo]

Only a supreme faggot throws around accusations like that without substantive proof.

The butthurt people I encounter on this forum are upset Trump won, upset they can no longer bully or censor their way into being the only voices heard, and threaten to run off to the liberal forums where opposing views are safely banned so they don't get exposed.

Since you would clearly not wish to be labelled a supreme faggot I look forward to your proof that anyone has run off to ''the liberal forums where opposing views are safely banned''.
If that is a reference to me going to PF.com I will expect evidence to support your claim......
I can start posting the endless anti-Islamic, left hating, holocaust denying gun loving messages that appear there in their 1000s if you like......