Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: How To Deal With Obfuscators: Start A New Thread On Each Stand Alone Bit of Nonsense
8 views
Skip to first unread message
Bret Cahill
Feb 22, 2013, 10:06:09 AM2/22/13
to
> > This works on libertarians, fundies, deniers and other winger dingers:
>
> >>> I think if you felt you had something worth saying, you'd _say_ it.
>
> >>> I did you seem to be offended by the science ergo you obfuscated your answer.
>
> > If you let obfuscators run a thread to two pages they'll think their
> > tactics are working.
>
> > Each "stand alone" nonsense is really new material and justifies a new
> > thread.
>
> > In these situations it's fun to drop the attributions and start a new
> > thread for each dodge, word game, etc.
>
> > Like a criminal returning to the scene of the crime the moron will
> > return to take credit and try to defend his nonsense. This will
> > concentrate the fun enormously!
>
> > You won't even have to do this 3 or 4 times before the obfuscator sees
> > that he's looking like Wile E. Coyote.
>
> > Bret Cahill
>
> input data FROM TEMP.DAT
> B 1.30774340384789E-0002
> A 2.66367071822169E+0001
> A + B*DATE = AVERAGE TEMPERATURE OVER TIME
>
The disagreement isn't on AGW. Mainstream scientists are probably a
little slow if anything.
The disagreement here is otherwise well intentioned posters allowing
3rd rate obfuscators run posts to 2 pages on newsgroups.
The obfuscator feels like he is accomplishing something and when you
consider that he is reducing effective bandwidth, maybe he is.
A post can't be effective if it is over a few lines. As Strunk &
White wrote, "omit needless lines and use the literary equivalent of
disk cleanup."
Ignore the person and focus on the disreputable tactics.
Drop the attributions and start a new thread for each dodge, word game
and other disreputable digression.
Like a criminal returning to the scene of the crime the moron will
return to take credit and try to defend his nonsense. This will
concentrate the fun enormously!
Only sub 80 IQ looneytarian deniers will be too stupid to figure out
that obfuscating doesn't work.
Bret Cahill
>
> >>> I think if you felt you had something worth saying, you'd _say_ it.
>
> >>> I did you seem to be offended by the science ergo you obfuscated your answer.
>
> > If you let obfuscators run a thread to two pages they'll think their
> > tactics are working.
>
> > Each "stand alone" nonsense is really new material and justifies a new
> > thread.
>
> > In these situations it's fun to drop the attributions and start a new
> > thread for each dodge, word game, etc.
>
> > Like a criminal returning to the scene of the crime the moron will
> > return to take credit and try to defend his nonsense. This will
> > concentrate the fun enormously!
>
> > You won't even have to do this 3 or 4 times before the obfuscator sees
> > that he's looking like Wile E. Coyote.
>
> > Bret Cahill
>
> input data FROM TEMP.DAT
> B 1.30774340384789E-0002
> A 2.66367071822169E+0001
> A + B*DATE = AVERAGE TEMPERATURE OVER TIME
>
The disagreement isn't on AGW. Mainstream scientists are probably a
little slow if anything.
The disagreement here is otherwise well intentioned posters allowing
3rd rate obfuscators run posts to 2 pages on newsgroups.
The obfuscator feels like he is accomplishing something and when you
consider that he is reducing effective bandwidth, maybe he is.
A post can't be effective if it is over a few lines. As Strunk &
White wrote, "omit needless lines and use the literary equivalent of
disk cleanup."
Ignore the person and focus on the disreputable tactics.
Drop the attributions and start a new thread for each dodge, word game
and other disreputable digression.
Like a criminal returning to the scene of the crime the moron will
return to take credit and try to defend his nonsense. This will
concentrate the fun enormously!
Only sub 80 IQ looneytarian deniers will be too stupid to figure out
that obfuscating doesn't work.
Bret Cahill
emoneyjoe
Feb 22, 2013, 3:40:05 PM2/22/13
to
0 new messages