Rightardia
2010-07-08 20:12:29 UTC
It's interesting to see the latest right wing tactics that can be
described as getting in the last word. When a progressive writes an
article on alt.politics or other conference, he or she will certainly
experienced a conservative ad hominum cut n' paste attack.
Looking at some of the stats in alt.politics in Google.com, the number
of these cut 'n paste attacks suggests the GOP is using bots to respond
to progressive posters.
Rightardia writes articles on it blog and then posts a summary of the
article with a hyperlink on USENET.
A standard tactic that conservative trolls use, it to suggest the
article needs a citation although Rightardia and most progressive
posters include a source reference. Rightardia provides sources with
close to 90 per cent of tis articles with the exception of videos.
Ad hominem abuse, which is a form of cyber-bullying, usually involves
insulting or belittling one's opponent, but can also involve pointing
out factual but ostensible character flaws or actions which are
irrelevant to the opponent's argument.
This tactic is logically fallacious because insults and even true
negative facts about the opponent's personal character have nothing to
do with the logical merits of the opponent's arguments or assertions.
An ad hominem, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "to the
man"), is an attempt to persuade which links the validity of a premise
to a characteristic or belief of the person advocating the premise.
Conservatives are essentially attacking the person who is posting the
article rather than addressing the information or conclusions in the
actual article.
Why would they do this? Many of the T-Bagger type of posters on USENET
are poorly educated or too lazy to do valid research to refute an
argument. It is easier for them to suggest that the progressive poster
is gay, stupid, un-American or a communist.
Many of the conservatives who used to post don't anymore because their
articles were highly biased or contained factual errors. One good
example of this was Jose Soplar who used to post long treatises that
contained an assortment of misinformation when Bush was president.
I recall one article in which Jose suggested the Shah of Iran was a good
guy. The Shah was actually a dictator and US puppet who never had the
support of the Iranian people.
My advise to progressives: keep on posting. Let them Spam your posts. My
blogs ratings improve when there is controversy. Ignore the right wing
bastards.
The pen is mightier than the sword.
_ _ _
Rightardia: The progressive alternative to conservative fascism. Slow
thinkers keep right.
described as getting in the last word. When a progressive writes an
article on alt.politics or other conference, he or she will certainly
experienced a conservative ad hominum cut n' paste attack.
Looking at some of the stats in alt.politics in Google.com, the number
of these cut 'n paste attacks suggests the GOP is using bots to respond
to progressive posters.
Rightardia writes articles on it blog and then posts a summary of the
article with a hyperlink on USENET.
A standard tactic that conservative trolls use, it to suggest the
article needs a citation although Rightardia and most progressive
posters include a source reference. Rightardia provides sources with
close to 90 per cent of tis articles with the exception of videos.
Ad hominem abuse, which is a form of cyber-bullying, usually involves
insulting or belittling one's opponent, but can also involve pointing
out factual but ostensible character flaws or actions which are
irrelevant to the opponent's argument.
This tactic is logically fallacious because insults and even true
negative facts about the opponent's personal character have nothing to
do with the logical merits of the opponent's arguments or assertions.
An ad hominem, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "to the
man"), is an attempt to persuade which links the validity of a premise
to a characteristic or belief of the person advocating the premise.
Conservatives are essentially attacking the person who is posting the
article rather than addressing the information or conclusions in the
actual article.
Why would they do this? Many of the T-Bagger type of posters on USENET
are poorly educated or too lazy to do valid research to refute an
argument. It is easier for them to suggest that the progressive poster
is gay, stupid, un-American or a communist.
Many of the conservatives who used to post don't anymore because their
articles were highly biased or contained factual errors. One good
example of this was Jose Soplar who used to post long treatises that
contained an assortment of misinformation when Bush was president.
I recall one article in which Jose suggested the Shah of Iran was a good
guy. The Shah was actually a dictator and US puppet who never had the
support of the Iranian people.
My advise to progressives: keep on posting. Let them Spam your posts. My
blogs ratings improve when there is controversy. Ignore the right wing
bastards.
The pen is mightier than the sword.
_ _ _
Rightardia: The progressive alternative to conservative fascism. Slow
thinkers keep right.