Jump to content
Snipafist

Reminder: you can ignore other users

Recommended Posts

People, please.

We are allowed to have opinions on everything.  That's fine, and as much as I may think you're simply wrong or just are flat out stupid for your opinion, that doesn't change the fact that it is your opinion, you have a conviction and until you start threatening someone's life, you can have it, I'll respect it, and everything will be well in the world.

But this is a Star Wars: Armada forum.  It is not a Trump support/opposition forum, not a pro-feminism or anti-feminism, pro-SJW or anti-SWJ, nor any of those things.  I come here to talk about plastic spaceships, rolling dice and admiral shaming, not discuss abortion, thank you very much.

And to a certain extent, we're not here to discuss TLJ or any of its actual or perceived political implications.  So, please, everyone: STAY ON TARGET.  STAY ON TOPIC.  I don't want to keep fearing that a topic is going to be locked every single time someone mentions TLJ.  We are better than this.

Today I learned I can ignore users.  That's nice and new for me, although not Armada-related.  Now, if you don't mind, I'll leave this topic forever.

I don't care who is right-er or wrong-er.  I just want to shoot at spaceships, for Snoke's sake!

Edited by BillHimclaw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cpt. Caine said:

You are mistaken on many levels.

I called THIRD WAVE feminism such (you know, not the kind that posits gender equality above what we see in the US - but which is present for an example in Scandinavia where I hail from - the kind that posits that men should be intently diminished and all sorts of radical opinions that rational people usually don't support and would fight against if it hadn't hijacked the feminist agenda).

I did it AFTER the other side in an argument strawmanned an untenable position against feminism. Just like you're doing now. Obviously I'll explain that it's, in my opinion? a drop in the water in relation to people disliking TLJ - but it is a drop when it comes to showing down a viewpoint down people's throat. Whilst painting yourself up to be the champion of 'good' without understanding what you're blindly fighting.

Do you know who thinks (third wave) feminism is a threat to major pillars of Western society?

People like Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins and Steven Pinker. All declared feminists. All left wing (in the American sense of left and right). One a fervent spearheader of gay rights. One an extremely vocal Trump critic. All paragons of science.

I'm guessing a lot of these things are read into the toxic political climate in the US? So, service announcement for social justice warriors (I still don't comprehend how you can find this term more problematic than the myriad of derogatory things said about me and other people who dislike TLJ. Neither do I ever really use it. But you pigeonholed me as someone who does, so fair enough): You can criticise feminism, for good reasons, without being a Trump supporter.

It was very tempting to simply let this post speak for itself.  But then I realized this thread will be locked by morning anyway, and was more or less guaranteed to be from the moment it was created, so I would rather continue the smoldering dumpster fire than risk demonstrating this to be something nobody had an answer to.  Apologies to those who like civil, non-contentious discussion; you already knew you were in the wrong place and I hope to see you in nicer conditions.

Firstly, you’re falsely attempting to paint third-wave feminism by its ugliest parts.  It’s a broad term encompassing everything from increased discussion of sexual harassment to pushing transgender and reproductive rights.  If you genuinely dislike the entire movement I’m not even sure what to say.  Are there aspects and followers of the ideology I find shrill or extreme?  Of course.  Do I find it intolerable for you to incorrectly generalize, exaggerate and put words in my mouth while accusing people of doing the same to you?  Yes.  Yes I do.

Speaking of words in my mouth: I never assumed you were a Trump supporter, nor did I call you one, nor was I the one to mention him.  So let’s drop that.  I did not “pigeonhole” you as someone who uses the term “SJW.”  You used it again in the very post I’m quoting, in fact.  If you don’t want to be seen as someone who uses the term, don’t use it.  It’s simple.

Still waiting on an actual argument against third-wave feminism, by the way.  You’ve said it’s a threat, you’ve listed people who oppose it (some of whom I actually respect,) but I have yet to hear any specific grievances beyond a vague “they want to oppress men” claim.  I’m sure you’ll have them, because they exist and again, certain aspects of the ideology grate on me, but from a structural perspective it’s still interesting to see a lack of specifics with the expectation of changing minds.

Did I miss anything?  Pretty much everything else you’ve said is some form of personal attack, and as such is not worthy of a response.

Edited by The Jabbawookie
Punctuation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, The Jabbawookie said:

It was very tempting to simply let this post speak for itself.  But then I realized this thread will be locked by morning anyway, and was more or less guaranteed to be from the moment it was created, so I would rather continue the smoldering dumpster fire than risk demonstrating this to be something nobody had an answer to.  Apologies to those who like civil, non-contentious discussion; you already knew you were in the wrong place and I hope to see you in nicer conditions.

Firstly, you’re falsely attempting to paint third-wave feminism by its ugliest parts.  It’s a broad term encompassing everything from increased discussion of sexual harassment to pushing transgender and reproductive rights.  If you genuinely dislike the entire movement I’m not even sure what to say.  Are there aspects and followers of the ideology I find shrill or extreme?  Of course.  Do I find it intolerable for you to incorrectly generalize, exaggerate and put words in my mouth while accusing people of doing the same to you?  Yes.  Yes I do.

Speaking of words in my mouth: I never assumed you were a Trump supporter, nor did I call you one, nor was I the one to mention him.  So let’s drop that.  I did not “pigeonhole” you as someone who uses the term “SJW.”  You used it again in the very post I’m quoting, in fact.  If you don’t want to be seen as someone who uses the term, don’t use it.  It’s simple.

Still waiting on an actual argument against third-wave feminism, by the way.  You’ve said it’s a threat, you’ve listed people who oppose it (some of whom I actually respect,) but I have yet to hear any specific grievances beyond a vague “they want to oppress men” claim.  I’m sure you’ll have them, because they exist and again, certain aspects of the ideology grate on me, but from a structural perspective it’s still interesting to see a lack of specifics with the expectation of changing minds.

Did I miss anything?  Pretty much everything else you’ve said is some form of personal attack, and as such is not worthy of a response.

1) I think we both agree on what you expressed in the first paragraph. I for one find it somewhat hilarious that a thread singling out one member of the community with malicious intent has been longer for life than threads containing asides mentioning TLJ. That said, I generally don't think ignoring people, nor closing threads is a way to handle debate. But that's besides the point.

2) "Do I find it intolerable for you to incorrectly generalize, exaggerate and put words in my mouth while accusing people of doing the same to you?  Yes.  Yes I do." along with further comments in your post... Can we stop for a moment here and appreciate that this is a case of me responding, to you responding, to me responding, to you responding, to me responding to someone else, who was originally @geek19 even responding to a general 'you' - not even me? Whilst responding to you, I at least only meant for an insignificant portion of it to be targeted at YOU specifically.

Also, partly, we're both just doing rebuttals here because we know how to argue like grown ups. I'm not sure there's anything wrong with that. We're also both, apparently, just straw manning each other heavily too.

I'll, again, remind you that I did not originally mention SJW, feminism or any of these topics. The discussion took off from discussing how  to interpret SSD overlapping instances in Armada, based on canon regarding The Executor and the internal consistency of space battles in Star Wars in relation to collisions between ships and ships, as well as fighters and ships. So to me we're 6 degrees off topic here, in a meta-thread about a meta-discussion.

And again, again - I do not ascribe to an ideology where singular words are arbitrarily 'bad' or 'illegal'. SJW is a descriptive term. I don't mind using it. I just said I wasn't the one who introduced it to the discussion, since you seem to find it inherently intolerable. It actually leads perfectly into my second to last point.

3) I'd encourage you to read Enlightenment Now, Steven Pinker's most recently published book or listen to Sam Harris' podcast - in some of which Richard Dawkins appears and speaks on the topic as well, since he hasn't been as productive due to his health lately. Interestingly, and poignant, Sam Harris recently had an extremist feminist on his show and allowed her an entire episode worth of speaking time. I forced myself to sit through it - as his intention was indeed for that side to get heard on its own terms as well. 

Anyway, a quick summary. Scientific endeavour (and by extension, in a democratic societal dialogue) is based on the free expression of ideas and thoughts. The movement that has hijacked the feminist agenda (let us not so much argue specifics on third wave feminism here, I cherry picked the worst parts, you cherry picked some good parts) has also introduced safe spaces in Universities and arbitrarily limited what you can teach such through censorship and trigger warnings, been instrumental in limiting research topics via the Ethics Review Boards based on subjective criteria, in relation to anti-harassment policies and reactions summarily removed concepts such as 'innocent until proven guilty' in practice. Worst of all though, feminist critical theory has politicised and relativised science in a degree that - and you are welcome not to take my word for it but look to those sources I mentioned - hasn't been seen in many decades. What is ironic is that national conservative, anti-vaxxers and populist agendas on the other end of the political spectrum, abuse the openings created by a movement that is considered legitimate to do the same by for an example further pushing the censoring of curriculum in relation to evolution.

4) "Did I miss anything?  Pretty much everything else you’ve said is some form of personal attack, and as such is not worthy of a response."

I mean, that's pretty ironic given how that would be interpreted by most people as a personal attack - especially given the context of the thread. But let us not back and forth on this ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Cpt. Caine said:

1) I think we both agree on what you expressed in the first paragraph. I for one find it somewhat hilarious that a thread singling out one member of the community with malicious intent has been longer for life than threads containing asides mentioning TLJ. That said, I generally don't think ignoring people, nor closing threads is a way to handle debate. But that's besides the point.

2) "Do I find it intolerable for you to incorrectly generalize, exaggerate and put words in my mouth while accusing people of doing the same to you?  Yes.  Yes I do." along with further comments in your post... Can we stop for a moment here and appreciate that this is a case of me responding, to you responding, to me responding, to you responding, to me responding to someone else, who was originally @geek19 even responding to a general 'you' - not even me? Whilst responding to you, I at least only meant for an insignificant portion of it to be targeted at YOU specifically.

Also, partly, we're both just doing rebuttals here because we know how to argue like grown ups. I'm not sure there's anything wrong with that. We're also both, apparently, just straw manning each other heavily too.

I'll, again, remind you that I did not originally mention SJW, feminism or any of these topics. The discussion took off from discussing how  to interpret SSD overlapping instances in Armada, based on canon regarding The Executor and the internal consistency of space battles in Star Wars in relation to collisions between ships and ships, as well as fighters and ships. So to me we're 6 degrees off topic here, in a meta-thread about a meta-discussion.

And again, again - I do not ascribe to an ideology where singular words are arbitrarily 'bad' or 'illegal'. SJW is a descriptive term. I don't mind using it. I just said I wasn't the one who introduced it to the discussion, since you seem to find it inherently intolerable. It actually leads perfectly into my second to last point.

3) I'd encourage you to read Enlightenment Now, Steven Pinker's most recently published book or listen to Sam Harris' podcast - in some of which Richard Dawkins appears and speaks on the topic as well, since he hasn't been as productive due to his health lately. Interestingly, and poignant, Sam Harris recently had an extremist feminist on his show and allowed her an entire episode worth of speaking time. I forced myself to sit through it - as his intention was indeed for that side to get heard on its own terms as well. 

Anyway, a quick summary. Scientific endeavour (and by extension, in a democratic societal dialogue) is based on the free expression of ideas and thoughts. The movement that has hijacked the feminist agenda (let us not so much argue specifics on third wave feminism here, I cherry picked the worst parts, you cherry picked some good parts) has also introduced safe spaces in Universities and arbitrarily limited what you can teach such through censorship and trigger warnings, been instrumental in limiting research topics via the Ethics Review Boards based on subjective criteria, in relation to anti-harassment policies and reactions summarily removed concepts such as 'innocent until proven guilty' in practice. Worst of all though, feminist critical theory has politicised and relativised science in a degree that - and you are welcome not to take my word for it but look to those sources I mentioned - hasn't been seen in many decades. What is ironic is that national conservative, anti-vaxxers and populist agendas on the other end of the political spectrum, abuse the openings created by a movement that is considered legitimate to do the same by for an example further pushing the censoring of curriculum in relation to evolution.

4) "Did I miss anything?  Pretty much everything else you’ve said is some form of personal attack, and as such is not worthy of a response."

I mean, that's pretty ironic given how that would be interpreted by most people as a personal attack - especially given the context of the thread. But let us not back and forth on this ;)

OK.  It’s pleasing to slow down for a moment, and rarely an instinctive thing to do in an argument, so thank you for choosing the change in tone here.

I can’t speak for Geek19.  What I can say is that his response to you, while funny, was probably a little unfair on an individual level.  And, as aforementioned, the reaction you’ve received makes far less sense without context.  Part of the reason the Armada community is so polite and welcoming is because it’s made up of passionate people who recognize their often strong political opinions are better off not being discussed online.  TLJ discussion becomes political, and ugly; it’s almost a law of physics.  Everything you’ve encountered is a drop in the bucket compared to past threads, some of which are deleted entirely, some of which cost us members we liked.  That you received a snarky response is a symptom of our being completely fed up with something that consistently tests the decency of this forum.  (As an aside @Bakura83: please stop mentioning TLJ when it’s not distinctly relevant.  And that’s a high standard nowadays.)

Words have power; choose to use them, or don’t, but above all else don’t be surprised when they draw a response.  That’s the entire point of language.  Strong or controversial terms elicit a strong response to match.

With regards to the rest, I’ll not continue the political discussion, as things seem to be approaching a calm resolution.  Much of it is either, as you said, cherrypicked or ultimately subjective, neither of which warrant more specific debate right now (I may give Enlightenment Now a try, though.)  You still hold viewpoints I strongly disagree with, but I’d sooner recognize that and leave it by the wayside in favor of plastic spaceships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, The Jabbawookie said:

OK.  It’s pleasing to slow down for a moment, and rarely an instinctive thing to do in an argument, so thank you for choosing the change in tone here.

I can’t speak for Geek19.  What I can say is that his response to you, while funny, was probably a little unfair on an individual level.  And, as aforementioned, the reaction you’ve received makes far less sense without context.  Part of the reason the Armada community is so polite and welcoming is because it’s made up of passionate people who recognize their often strong political opinions are better off not being discussed online.  TLJ discussion becomes political, and ugly; it’s almost a law of physics.  Everything you’ve encountered is a drop in the bucket compared to past threads, some of which are deleted entirely, some of which cost us members we liked.  That you received a snarky response is a symptom of our being completely fed up with something that consistently tests the decency of this forum.  (As an aside @Bakura83: please stop mentioning TLJ when it’s not distinctly relevant.  And that’s a high standard nowadays.)

Words have power; choose to use them, or don’t, but above all else don’t be surprised when they draw a response.  That’s the entire point of language.  Strong or controversial terms elicit a strong response to match.

With regards to the rest, I’ll not continue the political discussion, as things seem to be approaching a calm resolution.  Much of it is either, as you said, cherrypicked or ultimately subjective, neither of which warrant more specific debate right now (I may give Enlightenment Now a try, though.)  You still hold viewpoints I strongly disagree with, but I’d sooner recognize that and leave it by the wayside in favor of plastic spaceships.

Thank you for the discourse.

I highly recommend Enlightenment Now. It is a data driven piece that challenges multiple incorrect believes about the world and it generally has a very positive message and agenda. It is slightly over-enthusiastic about the wonders of capitalism for my taste and disregards the distinction between income and capital that was Thomas Pikketys main (also data driven) point in his magnum opus Capital in the 21st Century when it considers wealth and equality. But that's my only issue with it.

 

 

I will make one last musinf regarding the issue at hand though. On a more general note.

If we take as a premise that the Armada Community at large is tired of hearing about TLJ criticisms (which I will maintain is at least partly false) BECAUSE it inadvertently turn a political and what not.

Then it ia highly curious that in all cases I've witnessed (with one exception) otherwise completely unpolitical discussions on the impact of events in TLJ (part if the Star Wars canon) have been hijacked and attacked by people 'who're tired if hearing about TLJ' who then brought up political issues.

Stating the obvious. It is oxymoronic that people who are tired of TLJ discussions turning political to turn them into political arguments.

In the case of the thread that was recently closed, this even took place when a person who took that exact oxymoronic stance and who wasn't involved in the discussion previously. So in effect they specifically sought out a discussion with TLJ references and got involved, with their first comment being that they didn't want to hear about TLJ criticisms. Nothing was forced upon anyone.

Maybe people who tire of TLJ discussions and their political nature should indeed ignore discussions about TLJ they don't care for instead of participating or starting hate campaigns against people who dislike TLJ :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, CaribbeanNinja said:

Star Wars Episode 8, The Last Jedi, was awesome. 

The more I watch it, the better it gets. 

(11th highest grossing film of at time)

”This is not going to go the way you think.”

I have only a few minor problems with The Last Jedi as a stand alone film.  The major issues I have, which are in my opinion, the fact that the entire movie seems to be trying to subvert the plot points set up in The Force Awakens.  Mind you these may be fixed in Star wars 9 but it just seems that Abrams and Johnson were not collaborating with this movie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cpt. Caine said:

Thank you for the discourse.

I highly recommend Enlightenment Now. It is a data driven piece that challenges multiple incorrect believes about the world and it generally has a very positive message and agenda. It is slightly over-enthusiastic about the wonders of capitalism for my taste and disregards the distinction between income and capital that was Thomas Pikketys main (also data driven) point in his magnum opus Capital in the 21st Century when it considers wealth and equality. But that's my only issue with it.

 

 

I will make one last musinf regarding the issue at hand though. On a more general note.

If we take as a premise that the Armada Community at large is tired of hearing about TLJ criticisms (which I will maintain is at least partly false) BECAUSE it inadvertently turn a political and what not.

Then it ia highly curious that in all cases I've witnessed (with one exception) otherwise completely unpolitical discussions on the impact of events in TLJ (part if the Star Wars canon) have been hijacked and attacked by people 'who're tired if hearing about TLJ' who then brought up political issues.

Stating the obvious. It is oxymoronic that people who are tired of TLJ discussions turning political to turn them into political arguments.

In the case of the thread that was recently closed, this even took place when a person who took that exact oxymoronic stance and who wasn't involved in the discussion previously. So in effect they specifically sought out a discussion with TLJ references and got involved, with their first comment being that they didn't want to hear about TLJ criticisms. Nothing was forced upon anyone.

Maybe people who tire of TLJ discussions and their political nature should indeed ignore discussions about TLJ they don't care for instead of participating or starting hate campaigns against people who dislike TLJ :) 

The issue lies partially in the fact that these are not threads where TLJ discussions belong.  Users bring them in to vent; though there is some loose, minor level of relevance, it’s a fundamentally inflamed topic being brought unexpectedly to a conversation where people trying to avoid reading complaints end up doing so anyway.  Until today, you wouldn’t have known better and were probably just trying to start a conversation.  Actual content of the post aside, I accept that now.  Others in that conversation should have known better.  If venting is the game, starting an appropriately titled thread is just decent behavior so people can abstain without ditching whatever they were talking about.  For Geek to respond negatively, he had to be reading or intending to read the discussion when it was on topic.  Dropping TLJ into threads not intended for it is a little like lighting a cigarette indoors when one of your friends has asthma.  If you must smoke, smoke outside.

Edited by The Jabbawookie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, chr335 said:

I have only a few minor problems with The Last Jedi as a stand alone film.  The major issues I have, which are in my opinion, the fact that the entire movie seems to be trying to subvert the plot points set up in The Force Awakens.  Mind you these may be fixed in Star wars 9 but it just seems that Abrams and Johnson were not collaborating with this movie

Yeah totally, and I actually see the beauty in that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, CaribbeanNinja said:

Star Wars Episode 8, The Last Jedi, was awesome. 

The more I watch it, the better it gets. 

(11th highest grossing film of at time)

”This is not going to go the way you think.”

I'm glad someone enjoyed it ;)

It is actually the 43rd highest grossing films once you adjust for inflation (otherwise you can't compare across the years), whilst being relatively more expensive to produce. Source: https://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/adjusted.htm

I'm also fairly certain the majority of Star Wars fans gave up on Disney Wars AFTER TLJ as witnessed by the historical failure of Solo:A Star Wars story. 

Interestingly A New Hope grossed 2nd highest in history :)

Edited by Cpt. Caine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, CaribbeanNinja said:

As a scientist, I’m fairly certain you’re lacking evidence here. ;)

 

Haha. It IS a classic case of correlation does not equal causality. That is true.

Disney apparantly finds it so probably that they cancelled movies, though, so I'm not alone in my belief ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, CaribbeanNinja said:

The old scapegoat was Lucas...

New scapegoat is Disney...

 

I haven't missed that little irony either, haha.

I don't recall ever thinking people critizing A Phantom Menace were worthless to listen to though. I don't recall this level if animosity in various Star Wars communities back then, but I was also mostly involved in debating studd like whether Padme wasn't in fact a specific handmaiden's name and Queen Amidala was in fact not named Padme as a first name prior to Episode 2 based on the games and books that came out along with the film.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...