XPost: rec.games.video.classic, rec.games.video.nintendo
From: starsabre@net.att
In article <1190175469.133874.36920@o80g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
The Space Boss wrote:
> Aw, come on.. you agreed with a majority of what he said - I'm a very
> busy man, ok, but IF YOU INSIST upon it, I will go over your post with
> a fine tooth comb, I just didn't want to waste everyone's time when
> they could scroll up and see for themselves what I was saying was
> accurate.
First, you show your lack of understanding of how news readers work.
There are many, none of which mimic each other identically. Some
readers are set so that once a message is read, after that newsgroup is
closed for the session, the next time it is opened, it cannot be found
without some work. So for some (like me), we can't just scroll up to
see the previous post.
As to what you said being accurate, see my previous post.
Actually, to save some trouble, I will again capitulate that I agreed on
several points at least partially, but I did not agree with the
assessment.
> Why don't you guys just admit this could be a legitimate
> poster? Right away, if something disagrees with what the majority
> thinks he is labeled a troll.
His style of post is the classic troll for, go in saying something
controversial to get people all riled up, and do not return to back his
position. This happens so often, thus the term. Disagreement itself is
not trolling, shit disturbing is.
> And everyone's getting mad because
> people are responding to them, I mean what is that about?? Sure it
> "could" be a troll, but again, my good man, you agreed with a vast
> majority of his statements is all I was saying ok?
I don't know that I called him a troll, although I know I thought he was
when I read his post. But I found a response and discussion could be
entertaining. Sometimes, trolls do spark debate. But they're still
trolls.
jt
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
