Any Point in Commenting in a Big Thread?

[quote]anonym wrote:

[quote]TigerTime wrote:
I’ve never had this problem. Maybe you’re just not controversial enough. [/quote]

Yeah, but being controversial for the sole sake of grabbing some limelight makes you a tool.

If it’s a natural extension of your honest opinion, then that’s fine.

If you post dumb shit just to get a reaction, you’re a troll. If you post dumb shit simply to be a contrarian, you’re a hipster douche… no matter how Socratic you fancy your gadfly responses to be.

There’s a sweet spot somewhere in between, I think. People can usually judge the motivations behind various posts.[/quote]

X2. There comes a point where so many people are just posting controversial views to stand out, that they just blend in with everyone else doing the same. There are at least three posters who do nothing but take an opposite stance for attention, and the one thing they have in common is that there’s very little depth or constancy in what they say… it’s just random emotional button-pushing.

Mary, Mary (of garden-growing nursery rhyme fame) was so busy being contrary that she forgot “silver bells, cockle shells and pretty maids all in a row” don’t actually constitute a garden. They certainly don’t grow. But at least she was different. So it is that contrarians, in their rush to be contrary, often forget to have a point.

Kindergarten philosophy FTW.

[quote]ranengin wrote:

[quote]anonym wrote:

If you post dumb shit just to get a reaction, you’re a troll.[/quote]

As a proud member of the international brotherhood of trolls, I take umbrage with this statement.

Sometimes we say smartass shit to get a reaction too.

Now carry on with your taking internet forums seriously. [/quote]

Make that four.

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]anonym wrote:

[quote]TigerTime wrote:
I’ve never had this problem. Maybe you’re just not controversial enough. [/quote]

Yeah, but being controversial for the sole sake of grabbing some limelight makes you a tool.

If it’s a natural extension of your honest opinion, then that’s fine.

If you post dumb shit just to get a reaction, you’re a troll. If you post dumb shit simply to be a contrarian, you’re a hipster douche… no matter how Socratic you fancy your gadfly responses to be.

There’s a sweet spot somewhere in between, I think. People can usually judge the motivations behind various posts.[/quote]

X2. There comes a point where so many people are just posting controversial views to stand out, that they just blend in with everyone else doing the same. There are at least three posters who do nothing but take an opposite stance for attention, and the one thing they have in common is that there’s very little depth or constancy in what they say… it’s just random emotional button-pushing.

Mary, Mary (of garden-growing nursey rhyme fame) was so busy being contrary that she forgot “jingle bells, cockle shells and pretty maids all in a row” don’t actually constitute a garden. They certainly don’t grow. But at least she was different. So it is that contrarians, in their rush to be contrary, often forget to have a point.

Kindergarten philosophy FTW.[/quote]

That’s such crap, contrarians always remember to have a point!

[quote]LHT wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]anonym wrote:

[quote]TigerTime wrote:
I’ve never had this problem. Maybe you’re just not controversial enough. [/quote]

Yeah, but being controversial for the sole sake of grabbing some limelight makes you a tool.

If it’s a natural extension of your honest opinion, then that’s fine.

If you post dumb shit just to get a reaction, you’re a troll. If you post dumb shit simply to be a contrarian, you’re a hipster douche… no matter how Socratic you fancy your gadfly responses to be.

There’s a sweet spot somewhere in between, I think. People can usually judge the motivations behind various posts.[/quote]

X2. There comes a point where so many people are just posting controversial views to stand out, that they just blend in with everyone else doing the same. There are at least three posters who do nothing but take an opposite stance for attention, and the one thing they have in common is that there’s very little depth or constancy in what they say… it’s just random emotional button-pushing.

Mary, Mary (of garden-growing nursey rhyme fame) was so busy being contrary that she forgot “jingle bells, cockle shells and pretty maids all in a row” don’t actually constitute a garden. They certainly don’t grow. But at least she was different. So it is that contrarians, in their rush to be contrary, often forget to have a point.

Kindergarten philosophy FTW.[/quote]

That’s such crap, contrarians always remember to have a point!
[/quote]

Of course! The point is to be contrarian. Silly me!

Can’t we all just agree to disagree?

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
Can’t we all just agree to disagree?
[/quote]

^ Being contradictory to contrarians. That is some next-level contrarian-ing right there.

[quote]TigerTime wrote:

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
Can’t we all just agree to disagree?
[/quote]

^ Being contradictory to contrarians. That is some next-level contrarian-ing right there.[/quote]
plz don’t break teh internetz

I am johny come lately …weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa my post is not going…

wtf am I doing

/exit thread