Hermit wrote:
And a fucking waste of time, as was In Sitchu, though the latter was decidedly, though clumsily devious as well.

Spinozasgalt wrote:There was that fellow a little while back who reckoned Pride was depraved and had his whole set of pictures to go with it. I wonder if this guy and that guy were any relation.

Spearthrower wrote:It's nothing to do with confirmation bias. It's analysis of written style, tone, and content.

Spinozasgalt wrote: I wonder if this guy and that guy were any relation.

Hermit wrote:ohh ahhh. ggorlock is a banned troll now. He'll be visiting his more welcoming media sites now with another feather in his hatband, reporting to all who will listen: "As I predicted, I was banned by yet another narrow-minded, leftie forum for merely expressing my opinion. Proof that lefties cannot tolerate dissent. Echo chambers, the lot."

I don't regard him as a troll in the sense that the Wikipedia defines it:

...a person who starts quarrels or upsets people on the Internet to distract and sow discord by posting inflammatory and digressive, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the intent of provoking readers into displaying emotional responses and normalizing tangential discussion, whether for the troll's amusement or a specific gain.

He was merely a right wing crusader who feels compelled to seek out left wing enemies and fight them wherever he finds them.

Spearthrower wrote:It's nothing to do with confirmation bias. It's analysis of written style, tone, and content.

SafeAsMilk wrote:

Hermit wrote:ohh ahhh. ggorlock is a banned troll now. He'll be visiting his more welcoming media sites now with another feather in his hatband, reporting to all who will listen: "As I predicted, I was banned by yet another narrow-minded, leftie forum for merely expressing my opinion. Proof that lefties cannot tolerate dissent. Echo chambers, the lot."

I don't regard him as a troll in the sense that the Wikipedia defines it:

...a person who starts quarrels or upsets people on the Internet to distract and sow discord by posting inflammatory and digressive, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the intent of provoking readers into displaying emotional responses and normalizing tangential discussion, whether for the troll's amusement or a specific gain.

He was merely a right wing crusader who feels compelled to seek out left wing enemies and fight them wherever he finds them.

Well that's the thing. At first the things he said were so stupid and without self-awareness that I figured it had to be a windup. Turns out he was just a fucking idiot who couldn't reason his way out of a wet paper bag

Hermit wrote:

Spearthrower wrote:It's nothing to do with confirmation bias. It's analysis of written style, tone, and content.

Spinozasgalt wondered if that fellow a little while back who reckoned Pride was depraved and had his whole set of pictures to go with it and ggorlock were related. I presume he wondered if they were the same person (and hopefully correct me if I misunderstood). Of course analysis of written style, tone and content needs to take place to come to a conclusion, but confirmation bias can lead to the wrong one. Nobody is exempt from being subject to confirmation bias. That is what my warning was about.

Fallible wrote: