Pineapple Express: Someone Is Wrong on the Internet?

[overgeeked]

Yeah, a lot of y'all never had a childhood crush on Christina Ricci as Wednesday Addams and it shows

Or her older sister Winona Ryder. Beetlejuice, Edward Scissorhands, and Dracula. 1988-1992 were good years.

 

[CleverNickName]

"Nobody cares! In fact, here's a 500-word rant about how little I care, and why nobody else should care about it either!"

 

[Reynard]

I propose a new rule: there should be a minimum number of posts by other posters before one is allowed to post again in a thread. That should cut down on the circular churn we see so often near the end of a thread's life, when there are just two or three people endlessly going at it. Maybe with an exception carved out for the OP.

 

[Cadence]

I propose a new rule: there should be a minimum number of posts by other posters before one is allowed to post again in a thread. That should cut down on the circular churn we see so often near the end of a thread's life, when there are just two or three people endlessly going at it. Maybe with an exception carved out for the OP.

Ah, now it's game theory and prognostication. How close is the thread to the end, and what's the optimal way to try and get the last word...

 

[Scribe]

As a broad rule for interacting online: sometimes it is okay to say your piece and then step away. You don't HAVE to go round and round with folks.

Its come to a point where essentially if someone doesn't want to be saved from their flawed views, who am I to try and enlighten them?

"Nobody cares! In fact, here's a 500-word rant about how little I care, and why nobody else should care about it either!"

This is my tension currently. I dont particularly care, so I just cannot be bothered with a long response, but I'm annoyed enough that I consider it.

Thank God for this thread...

 

[Cadence]

This is my tension currently. I dont particularly care, so I just cannot be bothered with a long response, but I'm annoyed enough that I consider it.

I try to limit myself to only a few topics that will push me over the edge... Curating my social media to avoid those few has been great.

Thank God for this thread...

Amen!

 

[Ryujin]

I propose a new rule: there should be a minimum number of posts by other posters before one is allowed to post again in a thread. That should cut down on the circular churn we see so often near the end of a thread's life, when there are just two or three people endlessly going at it. Maybe with an exception carved out for the OP.

A Discord channel that I'm on instituted a post timer on the Politics sub-channel, precisely because of the churn.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Just so I'm clear:

Statues are a vital way of learning about history, but history books should all be torn down? Is that correct?

 

[overgeeked]

What the hell even is that thread?

 

[Cadence]

Just so I'm clear:

Statues are a vital way of learning about history, but history books should all be torn down? Is that correct?

Kind of disappointed that adding context to statue signage might not help...

Why Just 'Adding Context' to Controversial Monuments May Not Change Minds

Research shows that visitors often ignore information that conflicts with what they already believe about history

www.smithsonianmag.com

... but I've been happy that our University is at least trying to add some new plaques in various places on campus.


I wonder about adding Marley and Marley chains to statues of the particularly egregious (the ones who were among the worst in their particular time). There are at least two on our statehouse grounds I would contribute to a go-fund-me to get them for...