XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.politics.trump   
   From: katt@gmail.com   
      
   On Fri, 16 Jan 2026 15:43:39 -0800,  Alan says...   
      
   > she wasn't trying to run him over.   
      
   But she did.   
      
   Faggot trolls on Usenet keep losing time after time after time, so what do   
   they do to keep their narcissistic asses from hanging themselves because their   
   self-esteem is taking too many hits?   
      
   "Obfuscation   
   "Fogging"   
   "Seeding The Doubt"   
   "Shifting Focus From Acts Reus To Mens Rea"   
   "Rules Lawyering" Or "Pedantry."   
   "Muddying The Waters"   
   "Legal Fallacy"   
   "Intent Fallacy"   
   "Moral Equivalence Distraction"   
   "Action Vs. Intent"   
   "Arguing Thought Processes"   
   "Good Intentions"   
      
   What is the term or name for what trolls on Usenet do, when they try to bring   
   in all the minutiae they can to muddy the waters and to convince others, that   
   THEIR logic is sound, when it's not?   
      
   Case in point: that in the righteous Minneapolis shooting, Good's thought   
   process is what counts... not the fact that she hit a FEDERAL AGENT, and we   
   all know what happens when you use a vehicle to injure or kill LEOs.   
      
   > "... she wasn't trying to run him over." - Ski Bunny Rich Boy Baker   
      
   "Irrelevant Technicality"   
      
   The specific behavior you are describing-focusing on IRRELEVANT details to   
   distract from the central, undeniable fact-is known as "The Gish Gallop" or,   
   more specifically in a legal/argumentative context, "Obfuscation by Minutiae."   
      
   LOL   
      
   I didn't even KNOW this term, but have been using it for years to describe   
   what rich boy Baker does when he loses an argument, and his narcissism   
   punishes him for that.   
      
   By flooding the discussion with "what-ifs," technicalities about the weather,   
   or the driver's internal state of mind, they attempt to create a "forest for   
   the trees" scenario where the primary act (striking the agent) is lost in a   
   sea of secondary details.   
      
      
   WHY Trolls Like Ski Bunny Do This:   
      
   On Usenet, these trolls aren't usually trying to "win" a LEGAL argument; they   
   are trying to win an "Attention War."   
      
   1. Exhaustion: By making you research 50 tiny points about "thought   
   processes," they drain your energy.   
      
   (not really, but do go on)   
      
   2. Validation: They want to make the defendant look like a "victim of   
   circumstance" rather than a perpetrator of an action, because of their TDS.   
      
   3. The "Well, Actually... " Trap: They use (pansy-ass pussy) pedantry to MAKE   
   THEMSELVES FEEL INTELLECTUALLY SUPERIOR while ignoring the human cost (the   
   injured agent).   
      
   Fuck you, faggot. The jig is up.   
      
   How long have I been saying that EXACT thing, without ANY formal training?   
      
   =====   
      
   The term for what these trolls are doing is "Obfuscation," but in the specific   
   context of Usenet and online debate, it is often called "Fogging" or "Seeding   
   the Doubt."   
      
   They are trying to shift the focus from Actus Reus (the "guilty act"-hitting   
   the agent) to a hyper-fixation on Mens Rea (the "guilty mind"-what she was   
   thinking or intending).   
      
   The Usenet Term: In old-school forum culture, this is often called "Rules   
   Lawyering" or "Pedantry." It involves using tiny, irrelevant technicalities to   
   'muddy the waters" so that the clear, central fact-the use of a vehicle as a   
   weapon-gets buried under a mountain of trivia.   
      
   The Legal Fallacy   
      
   The specific logical move they are making is often called the "Intent   
   Fallacy" or "Moral Equivalence" distraction.   
      
   Action vs. Intent: In many jurisdictions, hitting a law enforcement officer   
   (LEO) with a vehicle is a Strict Liability or General Intent issue. The law   
   cares that the act happened because the vehicle is inherently dangerous.   
      
   The Troll's Maneuver: By arguing about her "thought process," they are trying   
   to turn a clear-cut physical event into a philosophical debate about her "good   
   intentions," which legally does not negate the physical reality of the injury   
   to the agent.   
      
   =============================================================================   
      
   "Trump Derangement Syndrome" Is a Real Mental Condition   
      
   All you need to know about "Trump Derangement Syndrome," or TDS.   
      
   "Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS) is a mental condition in which a person has   
   been driven effectively insane due to their dislike of Donald Trump, to the   
   point at which they will abandon all logic and reason."   
      
   Justin Raimondo, the editorial director of Antiwar.com, wrote a piece in the   
   Los Angeles Times in 2016 that broke TDS down into three distinct phases or   
   stages:   
      
   "In the first stage of the disease, victims lose all sense of proportion. The   
   president-elect's every tweet provokes a firestorm, as if 140 characters were   
   all it took to change the world."   
      
   "The mid-level stages of TDS have a profound effect on the victim's   
   vocabulary: Sufferers speak a distinctive language consisting solely of   
   hyperbole."   
      
   "As TDS progresses, the afflicted lose the ability to distinguish fantasy from   
   reality."   
      
   The Point here is simple: TDS is, in the eyes of its adherents, the knee-jerk   
   opposition from liberals to anything and everything Trump does. If Trump   
   announced he was donating every dollar he's ever made, TDS sufferers would   
   suggest he was up to something nefarious, according to the logic of TDS.   
   There's nothing - not. one. thing. - that Trump could do or say that would be   
   received positively by TDSers.   
      
   The history of Trump Derangement Syndrome actually goes back to the early   
   2000s - a time when the idea of Trump as president was a punch line for late-   
   night comics and nothing more.   
      
   Wikipedia traces its roots to "Bush Derangement Syndrome" - a term first   
   coined by the late conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer back in 2003.   
   The condition, as Krauthammer defined it, was "the acute onset of paranoia in   
   otherwise normal people in reaction to the policies, the presidency - nay -   
   the very existence of George W. Bush."   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)