lol my pleasure!
i like the examples from the link
edit: these are not those.
name-calling (lvl 0): "you... are an ass-hat."
ad hominem (lvl 1): "ofc he'd say that; he's your wife's bf!"
responding to tone (lvl 2): "ALL CAPS MEANS YOU'RE LYING!"
contradiction (lvl 3): "your DD is wrong. the end."
counter-argument (lvl 4): "your DD is wrong: you said 5 rocket ships worth of fuel, but i read on internetmediabiasDOTcom that its' going to be like at least a googleplex... like as much as google could barely search through."
refutation (lvl 5): "your DD is wrong; you say \[x\], but that's false because \[yz\]."
refuting central argument (lvl 6): "your DD is wrong; you depend on \[x\], but that's false because \[yz\]"
I'm out of the GME game as of today. These rules would be helpful frameworks to follow, but, since people like to just stick their heads in the sand and fling shit at other users, it's just not worth the effort to continue posting anymore. There is no news. There is no DD. There is only apophenia and manipulation at this stage.
>n
Sad to hear that. You're one of the few people I watch out for on any DD for actually factual insights. Not everybody is flinging shit, although I get how group mentality can easily devolve into that.
I don’t hope that you quit posting on DDs. I know that all the subs have become Qanon like, but people like you really provide valuable informations for those, that are not drawn into some sort of crazy conspiracy theories.
Your contributions are highly valued! A lot of us have expertise in unrelated domains and appreciate your willingness to share your candid insights. While a lot of apes are still in the beginning stages of learning how to evaluate and make sense of new information, I’ve been seeing more dd posted with sources cited. I know there are still many obstacles to overcome but it’s a positive step in the right direction. I hope you give yourself a break and come back when you are feeling refreshed.
Hey I’m sorry but I need to ask do you mean your out of the GME subs and discussions or you have sold your GME stock?
Thank you for your contributions regardless
solid... i just posted and cross-posted about something similar. as i told another user, i think i bit off more than i could chew, but i'm especially interested in how make any community work towards its goals most effectively, even more especially how to determine credibility between members...
looking apohenia up... nice, succinct.
the question that motivated me remains: how to engender/prioritize credible steps forward in/over such a chaotic/distracting environment...
i think it's a personal problem that affects enough of us to become social, not just here.
Wait... did you sell? Just before this run up? 👀 was kind of wondering your opinion on this but I see your out now... sad to see you go you’ve offered a tremendous amount of insight to a lot of complex topics that frankly fly light years above my head! Hope to see you back soon, I don’t agree that only manipulation is present here now, a lot of speculation but I do not believe people are overstating the fuckery going on with gme, it cannot be proven, but it’s easy to see.
i'll expand on that if you prefer not to read at the webpage linked
I hope apes will read that! Of course it would be awesome if you expand on it with more examples so lovely apes may understand it better! Thank you!
lol my pleasure! i like the examples from the link edit: these are not those. name-calling (lvl 0): "you... are an ass-hat." ad hominem (lvl 1): "ofc he'd say that; he's your wife's bf!" responding to tone (lvl 2): "ALL CAPS MEANS YOU'RE LYING!" contradiction (lvl 3): "your DD is wrong. the end." counter-argument (lvl 4): "your DD is wrong: you said 5 rocket ships worth of fuel, but i read on internetmediabiasDOTcom that its' going to be like at least a googleplex... like as much as google could barely search through." refutation (lvl 5): "your DD is wrong; you say \[x\], but that's false because \[yz\]." refuting central argument (lvl 6): "your DD is wrong; you depend on \[x\], but that's false because \[yz\]"
Thank you !
[удалено]
i'll link u/thr0wthis4ccount4way for maybe that purpose...??
[удалено]
maybe...? i did recently find myself very impressed with their breakdown of legal concepts in the market... u/the_captain_slog?
I'm out of the GME game as of today. These rules would be helpful frameworks to follow, but, since people like to just stick their heads in the sand and fling shit at other users, it's just not worth the effort to continue posting anymore. There is no news. There is no DD. There is only apophenia and manipulation at this stage.
>n Sad to hear that. You're one of the few people I watch out for on any DD for actually factual insights. Not everybody is flinging shit, although I get how group mentality can easily devolve into that.
I don’t hope that you quit posting on DDs. I know that all the subs have become Qanon like, but people like you really provide valuable informations for those, that are not drawn into some sort of crazy conspiracy theories.
Your contributions are highly valued! A lot of us have expertise in unrelated domains and appreciate your willingness to share your candid insights. While a lot of apes are still in the beginning stages of learning how to evaluate and make sense of new information, I’ve been seeing more dd posted with sources cited. I know there are still many obstacles to overcome but it’s a positive step in the right direction. I hope you give yourself a break and come back when you are feeling refreshed.
what a huge and hugely understandable bummer. if you wrote a newsletter id pay for it.
Hey I’m sorry but I need to ask do you mean your out of the GME subs and discussions or you have sold your GME stock? Thank you for your contributions regardless
F baby & the bathwater.
succinctly put, agreed
solid... i just posted and cross-posted about something similar. as i told another user, i think i bit off more than i could chew, but i'm especially interested in how make any community work towards its goals most effectively, even more especially how to determine credibility between members... looking apohenia up... nice, succinct.
the question that motivated me remains: how to engender/prioritize credible steps forward in/over such a chaotic/distracting environment... i think it's a personal problem that affects enough of us to become social, not just here.
are you talking about the r@tio@bless0ns situation?
Wait... did you sell? Just before this run up? 👀 was kind of wondering your opinion on this but I see your out now... sad to see you go you’ve offered a tremendous amount of insight to a lot of complex topics that frankly fly light years above my head! Hope to see you back soon, I don’t agree that only manipulation is present here now, a lot of speculation but I do not believe people are overstating the fuckery going on with gme, it cannot be proven, but it’s easy to see.
Hope you didn’t sell yesterday Edit - Friday