RIP RSD
Leonardo
ulticritic
> with the spam and constant repetition of topics, its over for RSD.
its dead for you spirit zealots maybe......its alive and well for me
and my compadres.(and i dont think the spam bothers us one
bit..........as we have be givin that special power of being able to
IGNORE)
either way, I guess now its time to start working towards killing
spirit.
3jane.
Tony where would be without a little adversity in life? rsd may be
ailing a bit but it ain't pushing up daisies quite yet, think of it
this way rsd is down 4 in the second half and the wind is picking up,
does rsd get it done or just give up?
ulticritic
> On Jul 9, 8:18 am, Leonardo <mistermalcont...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > with the spam and constant repetition of topics, its over for RSD.
>
> Tony where would be without a little adversity in life?
YOUDE BE WHERE THE UPA IS NOW...........being run by a bunch of soft
ass pussies with no vision, insight or balls
ulticritic
why would you people rather that this newgroup rest in peace than LIVE
IN CONTROVERSY (LIC)?
Joe Segal
He is obviously a miserable person, and misery loves company, but
let's not give him that company. Let's stop giving him attention
because it is that attention that fuels him to spew his constant crap
onto rsd. Half of rsd anymore is toad drawing attention to himself,
and for whatever reason, he's been getting it. He's just some fuckin
guy who posts his rants on rsd 500 times a month, nobody important.
He doesn't even ever take the time or effort to come up with a well
written few sentences. He doesn't deserve the amount of attention he
gets. Let's let him go.
ulticritic
>
> He is obviously a miserable person, and misery loves company, but
> let's not give him that company. Let's stop giving him attention
> because it is that attention that fuels him to spew his constant crap
> onto rsd. Half of rsd anymore is toad drawing attention to himself,
> and for whatever reason, he's been getting it.
its because i intiate compelling dialouge about relevant and pertinant
issues......like any good journalist.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
He's just some fuckin
> guy who posts his rants on rsd 500 times a month, nobody important.
time will be the judge of that
------------------------------------------------------------------
> He doesn't even ever take the time or effort to come up with a well
> written few sentences. He doesn't deserve the amount of attention he
> gets. Let's let him go.
well is starting threads(or changing thread names) about me really the
way to go about ignoring me. Somthing like this is more of a jesture
than if you simply remained silent ya dumbass. Lets see if this one
can crack the 100 mark too.
Reggie Fanelli
---i'm curious, sincerely.....
is the attention really for himself, or for the "betterment" of the
sport,.(his idea of the improvement of the sport)
Joshua
can't seperate the two - that's seems to be the common complaint. this
weakens an otherwise strong argument.
Reggie Fanelli
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> > ---i'm curious, sincerely.....
> > is the attention really for himself, or for the "betterment" of the
> > sport,.(his idea of the improvement of the sport)
>
> can't seperate the two - that's seems to be the common complaint. this
> weakens an otherwise strong argument.
---so....toad voicing his opinion on what will make the sport
better.....is attention to himself?
then...what's the use of a 'discussion' group?
some folks HATE it when people post annonymously......
is EVERYONE supposed to post annonymously so that NO ONE gets
attention?
why do they even offer to post a name with messages then?
ulticritic
if YOU cant separate the two then thats a YOU problem. and i still
dont get how my fire for "otherwise strong arguments" would have any
effect on your stance on those same strong arguments. Its a classic
case of thowing the baby out with the bathwater i tells ya
jermleeds
> some folks HATE it when people post annonymously......
> is EVERYONE supposed to post annonymously so that NO ONE gets
> attention?
>
> why do they even offer to post a name with messages then?
The issue isn't whether a person posts anonymously or not. A poster
can contribute constructively to a dialog whether or not they attach
their meatspace identity to their posts. The issue is whether or not
those posts are constructive. When one's posts are racist, homophobic,
inflammatory, repetitive, intellectually lazy, and generally tiresome,
there's no way they become part of a constructive discussion, signed
or not.
ulticritic
isnt all that a matter of taste, what one can stomache, level of
political correctness, etc? In other words, why should i have to
curtail my schtick to appease a bunch of people that i fundamentally
disagree with on the meat of said issues anyways. You people are set
in your ways anyways so why should i bother being a boyscout about
what i say or how i say it? "i cant......I WONT".(js, in reference to
riding coach.....i think)
ulticritic
When one's posts are racist, homophobic,
> inflammatory, repetitive, intellectually lazy, and generally tiresome,
> there's no way they become part of a constructive discussion, signed
> or not.
but how does ANY of that translate into me trying to bring attention
to myself more so than to the issues? try and stay on topic
there......what was your actual name again????
Reggie Fanelli
> can contribute constructively to a dialog whether or not they attach
> their meatspace identity to their posts. The issue is whether or not
> those posts are constructive. When one's posts are racist, homophobic,
> inflammatory, repetitive, intellectually lazy, and generally tiresome,
> there's no way they become part of a constructive discussion, signed
> or not.
---oh. i totally disagree.
the ISSUE is ultimate frisbee.
a post can be constructive AND repetitive. why can't it be?
a post can be constructive AND intellectually lazy. WHAT IS
intellectually lazy? does that mean that there are misspelled words
and poor grammar? i don't think that misspelling a word or 30
prevents something from being constructive. why would it?
a past can be constructive and homophobic and racist. and....i
haven't seen all this racism and homophobic stuff that you guys always
claim are found in toads(and mine) posts. i only see super sensitive
phoney super political correctness from a lot of you guys.
a post can DEFINATELY be infammatory AND constructive. those are
probably some of the best.
thefan
> i only see super sensitive
> phoney super political correctness from a lot of you guys.
>
why would you expect anything else from a group of people who have to
get together to ignore someone. talk about afraid.
if you want to ignore toad, do it. you don't have to create a
movement, or share some super awesome "toadblocker", or gather up a
roster of like minded yahoos. all you have to do is not read the
posts that start with this word: ULTICRITIC.
you don't have to post a message to all your buddies, "hey guys, let's
ignore him"
grow up and grow some balls. make a decision all by yourself. want
to ignore, ignore. want to read, read. it's on you. quit looking
for a wingman for everymove you make in your miserable fear filled
lives.
The Fan
jacob
Throw
jimmy jimmy jimmy ....that's all many of us are asking of Todd
leber.
Grow some balls ...balls enough to act like an adult. The guy is of
course in his 40s and raising kids.
It's always entertaining when toad goes through a "okay, i won't be a
Total ass jack" phase and tosses out a blanket apology of sorts on
rsd.
I've only witnessed this twice.
Peter Mc
Columbia MO
ulticritic
> Toad cannot and will not will not be ignored.
i think wagonseller said it best when he said "you cant shut toad
down.....you can only hpeo to contain him".......of which, you cant
enven really do that.
ulticritic
> "grow up and grow some balls."
>
> jimmy jimmy jimmy ....that's all many of us are asking of Todd
> leber.
>
> Grow some balls ...balls enough to act like an adult.
i'm pretty sure the term "grow some balls" means more of "dont be a
spineless pussy" than "grow up" to most people.
I guess this is just further proof that spirit zealot types and
progressionists types dont see eye to eye on how to interpret even the
basics. So its no wonder that we dont see eye to eye on how to
interpret somthing as ambiguious as sotg.
3jane.
> to ignore, ignore. want to read, read. it's on you. quit looking
> for a wingman for everymove you make in your miserable fear filled
> lives.
You mean a wingman like you are for Toad?
Reggie Fanelli
> course in his 40s and raising kids.
---that's fucking queer as hell.
grow some balls and act like an adult.
stupid as shit.
do you mean to grow balls and spell everything right and don't repeat
yourself?
do you mean to grow balls and not call you fucking dorks out?
how does an adult act?
i've been one for a while...but still feel like a 16 year old.
do you have to be a stale played out dork who is overly politically
correct to be acting like an adult?
do adults not curse and call jackasses jackasses?
he's over 40 and raising a crop of kids....that's pretty adult.
he's got a job and gets paid.
he's responsible.
he's owned and opperated businesses....
i mean...shut the fuck up.
if you're that damned wishie washie nerdie queer...just shut the fuck
up.
thefan
i'll be Toads wingman any day, but he would never ask, nor would i ask
him.
he's got his platform. i've got mine. it just so happens that our
goals are pretty similar and we agree on one major issue when it comes
to getting there. refs.
it's very cute of you to try to throw that one back, but i can't seem
to remember where toad or i ever jumped on this group and asked for
folks to get together with us and do something that we should be
perfectly capable of doing by ourselves, which is look the other way
when someone says something we don't like.
oh, an Peter Mc, your beloved little community has already been
infiltrated by one of our own. you'll see.
Swear Allegiance to Wilmington Ultimate.
The Fan
Throw
infiltrated by one of our own. you'll see. "
I'm already ahead of you on that jimmy.
have a good weekend on that end.
Peter Mc
thefan
as best i can tell, you ain't ahead of me on nuthin.
scpoulos
you really can't separate the two? pretty easy to grasp what he
thinks is good for the sport. funny how he really gets under the
skin of so many rsd posters. It kind of amusing to read these posts
that complain so much about Toad. Shoot, why not write about something
else if you really don't like him as it seems that you don't. just
throwing it out there...
jermleeds
> > The issue isn't whether a person posts anonymously or not. A poster
> > can contribute constructively to a dialog whether or not they attach
> > their meatspace identity to their posts. The issue is whether or not
> > those posts are constructive. When one's posts are racist, homophobic,
> > inflammatory, repetitive, intellectually lazy, and generally tiresome,
> > there's no way they become part of a constructive discussion, signed
> > or not.
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> ---oh. i totally disagree.
> the ISSUE is ultimate frisbee.
> a post can be constructive AND repetitive. why can't it be?
> a post can be constructive AND intellectually lazy. WHAT IS
> intellectually lazy? does that mean that there are misspelled words
> and poor grammar? i don't think that misspelling a word or 30
Spelling and grammar are not the same as intellectual laziness.
Intellectual laziness is making arguments that intentionally or
unintentionally are not bolstered by facts, or worse, have no basis in
fact at all. Intellectual laziness is not directly addressing valid
criticisms to your arguments, but deflecting them with pathetic
playground-level rhetorical tricks or ad hominem attacks. Intellectual
laziness is relying in inflammatory language to make a point rather
than making a convincing case based on the merits of the argument.
Look, a poster could be a sociopath writing semi-literate Esperanto,
but if he makes solid points, backs them up, and responds to the
substance of other posters' responses, his rough edges are likely to
be tolerated. Absent all that, he's just gonna be a sociopath.
thefan
.
> Intellectual laziness is making arguments that intentionally or
> unintentionally are not bolstered by facts, or worse, have no basis in
> fact at all.
please elaborate on these arguments which are not bolstered by facts
or have no basis in fact at all.
> Intellectual laziness is not directly addressing valid
> criticisms to your arguments,
please address a valid criticism to this argument: the addition of
referees will make the sport of ultimate more watchable and therefore
more marketable and will in this way and in other ways foster growth.
because mostly what we get around here are accusations that he is a
bad speller TRUE
and that he is inflammatory. also TRUE, but in his defense, that
ain't how he started out. when you know something and people belittle
your valid argument by pointing out that you can't spell, it tends to
make you a little reactionary.
The Fan
Reggie Fanelli
> Intellectual laziness is making arguments that intentionally or
> unintentionally are not bolstered by facts, or worse, have no basis in
> fact at all.
---fuck all those facts and debate manners that ya'll are always
looking for.
fuck that.
who cares about your dumb assed criticism of arguments?
so what about playground level rhetoric?
we're playing a sport.....what's more playground than that?
who cares what sort of language is used?
we're in a discussion forum....we ain't writing the constitution or
anything like that.
shit....he's writing to you dumbasses.....what other sorts of language
should he use(or me)
his solid points are just that.....solid....and points.
who fucking cares HOW he says it?
to hell with how YOU nerds THINK he should or shouldn't post.
if you can't get past some certain words or phrases.....shut the fuck
up and don't read and reply
damn...ya'll are common as hell.
what's a sociopath?
pinto
> WHAT IS
> intellectually lazy? does that mean that there are misspelled words
> and poor grammar?
No. Poor spelling and poor grammar might often accompany intellectual
laziness, but they don't have to. I've got a joke for you:
Dude 1: Wearing a pink shirt doesn't make you gay.
Dude 2: No, it's having sex with other men makes you gay. Wearing the
pink shirt just makes you a stereotype.
A great many of Toad's arguments are logically fallacious. That's not
a fancy way of saying that they're wrong, it's a fancy way of saying
that they're useless. His most common failures are changes of
subject: ad hominem attacks, straw man arguments, and false
analogies.
Of late, he's been getting into the categorization game (race, gender,
numbering people 1-5, etc). When it comes to saying things about
groups and individuals, there are a bunch of other fallacies that one
can commit. Assuming that something that is true of an individual in
a group will hold for the entire group, or that a collective tendency
among an entire group implies a specific tendency within a particular
individual, stuff like that. There are fancy names for these things
like the "Fallacious Induction," but I don't feel it's too bad to wrap
all the fancy names into a nice, easy to understand group called
"intellectual laziness."
Now, the internet is full of people with the same pattern of
behavior. Those people are called trolls. Many trolls also have poor
English skills, but poor English skills aren't the thing that makes
Toad a troll. Trolling makes him a troll. The poor English skills
just make him a stereotype.
~p
pinto
> On Jul 10, 12:40 pm, Throw <i...@ThisIsUltimate.com> wrote:.
>
> > "grow up and grow some balls."
>
> > jimmy jimmy jimmy ....that's all many of us are asking of Todd
> > leber.
>
> > Grow some balls ...balls enough to act like an adult.
>
> i'm pretty sure the term "grow some balls" means more of "dont be a
> spineless pussy" than "grow up" to most people.
Reading comprehension, dearie. "Grow up AND grow some balls."
Regarding the first, you don't have to grow if you don't want to, but
it's hard to imagine being treated like a grown-up (i.e., elected,
listened to in serious discussion) if you don't.
Regarding the second, there's obviously a cultural difference here.
Some folks associate asshattery with a show of strength, and a
distaste for asshattery with weakness. You'd be in that group.
There's another group though that understands that dogs bark when
they're scared. They associate asshattery with weakness. Now, this
group might not enjoy the sound of dogs barking, but that doesn't mean
they're weak or scared of the dogs. They might just find incessant
barking to be... annoying.
~p
jermleeds
> because mostly what we get around here are accusations that he is a
> bad speller TRUE
Really? I respond to Toad quite often, and I rarely, if ever, ding him
for his spelling. Same with Pinto, and others. His spelling is the
absolute least of the problem. Go read Enver's post and tell me if it
is a critique of Toad's spelling.
Reggie Fanelli
>
> Dude 1: Wearing a pink shirt doesn't make you gay.
> Dude 2: No, it's having sex with other men makes you gay. Wearing the
> pink shirt just makes you a stereotype.
---you mentioned having a joke.....where is it?
is that it?
dudes 1 and 2?
THAT is what you call a joke?
damn....there's just no hope for you people.....
Reggie Fanelli
> A great many of Toad's arguments are logically fallacious. That's not
> a fancy way of saying that they're wrong, it's a fancy way of saying
> that they're useless. His most common failures are changes of
> subject: ad hominem attacks, straw man arguments, and false
> analogies.
>
> Of late, he's been getting into the categorization game (race, gender,
> numbering people 1-5, etc). When it comes to saying things about
> groups and individuals, there are a bunch of other fallacies that one
> can commit. Assuming that something that is true of an individual in
> a group will hold for the entire group, or that a collective tendency
> among an entire group implies a specific tendency within a particular
> individual, stuff like that. There are fancy names for these things
> like the "Fallacious Induction," but I don't feel it's too bad to wrap
> all the fancy names into a nice, easy to understand group called
> "intellectual laziness."
>
> Now, the internet is full of people with the same pattern of
> behavior. Those people are called trolls. Many trolls also have poor
> English skills, but poor English skills aren't the thing that makes
> Toad a troll. Trolling makes him a troll. The poor English skills
> just make him a stereotype.
---shit....i don't see a difference between Toad and all of ya'll when
taking the above stuff into account.
i see ya'll the same as you see him.
ulticritic
> I've got a joke for you:
>
> Dude 1: Wearing a pink shirt doesn't make you gay.
> Dude 2: No, it's having sex with other men makes you gay. Wearing the
> pink shirt just makes you a stereotype.
THAT is your idea of a joke????
Reggie Fanelli
> > Dude 2: No, it's having sex with other men makes you gay. Wearing the
> > pink shirt just makes you a stereotype.
>
> THAT is your idea of a joke????
--Strawman joke!!!!!
--intellectually lazy joke!!!!
--logically fallacious joke!!!!
--ad hominem joke!!!!
--false analogyy joke!!!
Dude 3---that effort of a joke makes YOU gay!!!
-------
now THOSE are funny!
jermleeds
> please address a valid criticism to this argument: the addition of
> referees will make the sport of ultimate more watchable and therefore
> more marketable and will in this way and in other ways foster growth.
Different topic, and my opinion on the matter has no bearing on the
current topic, which is the quality of arguments being made on RSD,
and Toad's specfically. If you must know, I fall pretty much in the
middle, and am in favor of the further development of the Observer
system as a reasonable middle road. I value SOTG, but I am not,
however, dead set against referees. Point is, I'm willing to talk. I
would hope that those who fall squarely in the pro-ref camp would also
be willing to talk. Alas, we get only shouting.
> because mostly what we get around here are accusations that he is a
> bad speller TRUE
>
> and that he is inflammatory. also TRUE, but in his defense, that
> ain't how he started out. when you know something and people belittle
> your valid argument by pointing out that you can't spell, it tends to
> make you a little reactionary.
Nah, no dice. You own your online personality, you can't explain it
away by blaming other people.
ulticritic
you mean that my extreem obnoxiousness here on rsd isnt a result of
the ass backwards the spirit zealots run the upa????
jermleeds
> now THOSE are funny!
Well Beavis, it looks like you'll always have Butthead to laugh at
your jokes. So you got that going for ya.
ulticritic
> would hope that those who fall squarely in the pro-ref camp would also
> be willing to talk.
talk?!?!?!? talk about what? the way the upa dosent do ANYTHING to
move forward in the ref dept.
Theres really nothing to say. some of us what refs, some are on the
fence and, well i dont know what the fuck you want(besides to
talk...how gay), and then some are adimently opposed.......and they
are the ones (save one or two that are fence dwellers) that run the
upa and basically set policy in the sport.
-------------------------------------------------
>Alas, we get only shouting.
well what in the fuck are we supposed to do when we have absolutley NO
REPRESENTATION!!!!!
ulticritic
>
> > now THOSE are funny!
>
> Well Beavis, it looks like you'll always have Butthead to laugh at
> your jokes. So you got that going for ya.
did you think there was even one drop of humor in puntos joke?
seanc
"laziness" suggests that the person in question could make a coherent
argument if he tried, but chooses not to. not sure that is the case
here.
sean
Reggie Fanelli
>
> Well Beavis, it looks like you'll always have Butthead to laugh at
> your jokes. So you got that going for ya.
---you're a dipshit.