CDZ More re: Behaviors - What percentage of people on USMB...

[JoeB131]

This is how it works.

Those who are part of the problem know, at some level, that their behaviors are wrong and counterproductive. That they are better than that. So when their behaviors are pointed out they choose to change the subject and attack the messenger rather than directly and honestly address the behaviors and their negative effects.

It would be smarter to just avoid the conversation entirely, but like a moth to a flame, their egos and self esteem just won't let them.

The sheer volume of material available for amateur psychological / sociological / anthropological study on this topic just doesn't end, and USMB is a fantastic one stop shop.

Or people just enjoy mocking the self-important.

I look at this board as just a lot of clean fun. Like it or not, we probably can't do anything about the madman the majority of us didn't want in the White House, but we can have a bit of fun at the expense of his supporters or Vichy liberals who think that not letting a Nazi speak at a campus is more serious than there actually being Nazis.

I don't expect to change any minds here. Never really did. But challenging the misinformation is always worth it.

 

[Mac1958]

I am less aggressive IN GENERAL in real life than I am on here. If someone attacks me in real life oh I am just as mean as I can be on here.. I will destroy someone I can get very violent and have road rage when dealing with idiots.

When you get violent, do you feel fully in control in the moment, or do you later wish you had handled the situation differently?
.

 

[Mac1958]

I am the same way here as I am in real life: an incorrigible smartass.

Oh, I think you're corrigible!

Here and there!

Now and then!

Pretty much!
.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

So, let me get this right -- the fellow who is capable of independent thought while critiquing both sides is "disrespectful", while the extreme partisan who has been insulting anybody who does not march in lockstep with his de rigueur extreme left orthodoxy isn't?

This is how it works.

Those who are part of the problem know, at some level, that their behaviors are wrong and counterproductive. That they are better than that. So when their behaviors are pointed out they choose to change the subject and attack the messenger rather than directly and honestly address the behaviors and their negative effects.

It would be smarter to just avoid the conversation entirely, but like a moth to a flame, their egos and self esteem just won't let them.

The sheer volume of material available for amateur psychological / sociological / anthropological study on this topic just doesn't end, and USMB is a fantastic one stop shop.
.

You even have your own personal stalker here, too. If I have noticed it, anybody should.

If there were a real world corollary, it appears that you cross the street when you see him coming.

 

[Mac1958]

You even have your own personal stalker here, too. If I have noticed it, anybody should.
If there were a real world corollary, it appears that you cross the street when you see him coming.

My stalker has been on ignore for a lonnnng time.

But it does appear I may be picking up another.


.

 

[mdk]

I’ve come to the conclusion that I am not interesting enough to have a stalker. After a day the person would be terribly bored and likely move on. *Do I really want to spend my afternoon watching this fag put together flower arrangements while he listens to the majestic symphonies of Anton Bruckner!?*

 

[Dogmaphobe]

*Do I really want to spend my afternoon watching this fag put together flower arrangements while he listens to the majestic symphonies of Anton Bruckner!?*

You left out three very important words, there, dude.




"In the nude"

 

[Mac1958]

*Do I really want to spend my afternoon watching this fag put together flower arrangements while he listens to the majestic symphonies of Anton Bruckner!?*

You left out three very important words, there, dude.
"In the nude"

AND THE PLOT THICKENS
.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

My stalker has been on ignore for a lonnnng time.

But it does appear I may be picking up another.


.

They do have quite the habit of outing themselves as exactly that which you describe, don't they?

 

[mdk]

*Do I really want to spend my afternoon watching this fag put together flower arrangements while he listens to the majestic symphonies of Anton Bruckner!?*

You left out three very important words, there, dude.




"In the nude"

How else do you arrange flowers?

 

[Olde Europe]

I don't expect to change any minds here. Never really did. But challenging the misinformation is always worth it.

Yes, of course, even successfully exposing misinformation doesn't change minds if intellectual laziness and the absence of a decent respect for facts conspire to thwart that change. It happens, though, rarely but...

 

[Dogmaphobe]

*Do I really want to spend my afternoon watching this fag put together flower arrangements while he listens to the majestic symphonies of Anton Bruckner!?*

You left out three very important words, there, dude.




"In the nude"

How else do you arrange flowers?

" he clutched the delicate blossom with trembling hands, fingers lingering a bit longer than necessary. He brushe a bit of the ripe and fecund pollen as if by accident, the turgid golden spheres starting to cling to the sweat rising from his flesh. He noticed the stigma starting to glisten and then ooze in heightened awareness as the swollen grains began erupting from the stamens, just a few at first and them in a frenzied symphony of herbal lust seeking release...…...

 

[mdk]

*Do I really want to spend my afternoon watching this fag put together flower arrangements while he listens to the majestic symphonies of Anton Bruckner!?*

You left out three very important words, there, dude.




"In the nude"

How else do you arrange flowers?

" he clutched the delicate blossom with trembling hands, fingers lingering a bit longer than necessary. He brushing a bit of the ripe and fecund pollen as if by accident, the turgid golden spheres starting to cling to the sweat rising from his flesh. He noticed the stigma starting to glisten and then ooze in heightened awareness as the swollen grains began erupting from the stamens, just a few at first and them in a frenzied symphony of herbal lust seeking release...…...

You should write Harlequin Romance novels.

 

[Mac1958]

WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON HERE

 

[Preacher]

I am less aggressive IN GENERAL in real life than I am on here. If someone attacks me in real life oh I am just as mean as I can be on here.. I will destroy someone I can get very violent and have road rage when dealing with idiots.

When you get violent, do you feel fully in control in the moment, or do you later wish you had handled the situation differently?
.

Oh I lose control,I mean I obviously have SOME control because I didn't grab my pistol or knife but I fly off the handle easily. After I calm down I think man I could have said something even better or done something even better,nothing to decrease the problem but something that would have pissed the person off more and made me feel like I won. ALWAYS happens...in the heat of the moment I am like a Tornado I just go crazy and defend myself verbally at first but escalation if need be. I am loud in general and have a deep voice so it usually scares people when I get loud and mean at same time. I have zero fear of people as well,no empathy for more people and no fear of authority figures or death or violence so I just go at it like a buzz saw.

 

[flacaltenn]

Yeah, Mac has a point, even while his point is thoroughly lacking in nuance. The downside is, he's taken the intellectually lazy path of discussing posters, as opposed to actual politics or policies. And that is why, for as long as I have watched him doing his shtick, he contributed exactly nothing to "human individuals sorting information and doing critical thinking".

Well there is the problem that RATIONAL folks are seeing. You kinda nailed it, but it invalidates your contention about content.

If you're gonna diss a Prez for being an ambiguous Twitter bully -- you SHOULD probably stick to issues and solutions. But that's not what happens.... Since the drama IS largely intimidation and bullying and name-calling from our "leaders" -- that's the script these "public audience" actors follow..

Don't know how many posts I've read complaining about Trumps exaggerated, appeal to emotion, tweets. But -- the folks WRITING this dialogue are meaner, more distorted and less comprehensible than what they complaining about. It's NOT an improvement.

And that's because public participation as "cast extra actors" is improv.. Not scripted. Not professionally written. And the vast majority of it is garbage and nauseating imitation..

If you EVER see posters BREAKING with the massive "cast" to write anything profound or solution directing --- PLEASE let us know...

It's Shakespeare for the masses, but demeaned by allowing the riff raff to grab a "bit part" in the play...

 

[flacaltenn]

And hey, maybe acting out like that helps some people. Holy crap, if that's the case, that's a great service for free.

It's great for the planet also -- not so many busted up TVs... Twitter is the ultimate in "rage generators" because Twitter has no topical framework. USMB is the virtual cathartic punching bag of social media.. At least we make them EXPLAIN their delusions and faux outrages..

I would love to know what motivates people to go through life like that, what they feel they have accomplished after such an altercation.

It's been a long social conditioning IMO.. That's why there was the rise and fall of "reality TV".. It's manufactured drama with yee olde freak show characters right out of Barnum/Bailey.. But what's happened is -- no one NEEDS Honey Boo Boo or the Kardarshian to kick around anymore because they've got wall to wall faux drama and conflict and emotion on Cable News and a media that's determined to capitalize on the "Barnum suckers"... Thanks to the Prez, the 535 members of Congress, outrage media superstars, and most rocks for brains Hollywood elite.

It's just a way to be part of show.. Look at the "intellectual engagement" on USMB. It's not anything from Real Life. Folks living vicariously believing they are part of the action and plot line. Like rushing to get their names on the OP for every breaking rumor or fake news outrage. THIS IS -- what media has always wanted.

Gonna go back and read the Marshall McLuhan that impressed me 30 years ago and see if he was actually a prophet. Remember "The Media IS the Message"? Found a way to make every US voter a cast member..

Wow, imagine what McLuhan would have thought and said about "the media" and social media TODAY. I always thought he was right on the money in context, but this environment is light years beyond the three-networks-on-TV days.

And Mac has got it right. The interactions we SEE here on USMB are not human individuals sorting information and doing critical thinking. It's folks ACTING as cast extras in a whole fabricated infotainment engagement that has EATEN America politics and leadership RAW...

This is the Selfie Generation. Everyone is a celebrity, everyone is a star, everyone has to scream their opinion at the top of their lungs, no one has to listen. There is no celebrity to be achieved in listening, being curious or asking questions or collaborating or innovating.

So yeah, the internet is essentially a caricature of that caricature.
.

I spent an hour last night cruising thru YouTube on McLuhan to see if I had a new article to write. LOL.

He got an awful lot of things horribly correct. But reading it today, you can't take it literally because of definitions of what media is now today. Some of it is academic elitism and preference for using the reason and logic side of the brain. But most of it was a quality merge of psychology and sociology and GREAT guessing.

He predicted the rise of tribalism as media got more participatory and democratic. This is the biggest "vision" in his work along with how each "medium" engages its audience. He labeled media as "hot or cold" depending on the type of vicarious experiences it could create.. A Hot medium was one that displayed works of art or completely scripted formats. Like "music radio" or "theater movies".. These could connect emotionally to people, but they stood on their own. There was no inferences to internalize because the script and content is a work in itself. Cold Media (like TV in his age) was a "stranger in your living room" and like any invited stranger, it had to behave in a certain way to SUSTAIN that invitation. So the medium of TV WAS consciously designed NOT to provoke or offend or certainly not to proselytize you into thinking about much.

It was the "cold" types of media that he feared would become interactive thru electricalization to the point, that it would have folks aligning along tribal lines to savagely butcher each other, as "tribes" generally do...

It's the human reaction to having "strangers in your living room" from an opposing tribe that's driving the constant degradation of human relations on a FULLY participatory unified internet media.. So TV is now tribalized not because it's a natural design of TV format -- but simply as a reaction to current state of dysfunction. And certain content is ONLY invited into certain living rooms and BANNED from others.

In FACT -- he got the premise of that latest Gillette Ad for toxic masculinity as he predicted that advertising would evolve to messaging that had NOTHING TO DO with the actual product. It would serve simply as a confirmation that the consumer "had made the right choice".. Because the product was just a confirmation of their "personal quest for identity"..

We're doomed I tell you... To answer your OP question directly -- It APPEARS that the number of people acting out on social media is definitely a majority. What's more important is that it's growing exponentially..

 

[Mac1958]

And hey, maybe acting out like that helps some people. Holy crap, if that's the case, that's a great service for free.

It's great for the planet also -- not so many busted up TVs... Twitter is the ultimate in "rage generators" because Twitter has no topical framework. USMB is the virtual cathartic punching bag of social media.. At least we make them EXPLAIN their delusions and faux outrages..

I would love to know what motivates people to go through life like that, what they feel they have accomplished after such an altercation.

It's been a long social conditioning IMO.. That's why there was the rise and fall of "reality TV".. It's manufactured drama with yee olde freak show characters right out of Barnum/Bailey.. But what's happened is -- no one NEEDS Honey Boo Boo or the Kardarshian to kick around anymore because they've got wall to wall faux drama and conflict and emotion on Cable News and a media that's determined to capitalize on the "Barnum suckers"... Thanks to the Prez, the 535 members of Congress, outrage media superstars, and most rocks for brains Hollywood elite.

It's just a way to be part of show.. Look at the "intellectual engagement" on USMB. It's not anything from Real Life. Folks living vicariously believing they are part of the action and plot line. Like rushing to get their names on the OP for every breaking rumor or fake news outrage. THIS IS -- what media has always wanted.

Gonna go back and read the Marshall McLuhan that impressed me 30 years ago and see if he was actually a prophet. Remember "The Media IS the Message"? Found a way to make every US voter a cast member..

Wow, imagine what McLuhan would have thought and said about "the media" and social media TODAY. I always thought he was right on the money in context, but this environment is light years beyond the three-networks-on-TV days.

And Mac has got it right. The interactions we SEE here on USMB are not human individuals sorting information and doing critical thinking. It's folks ACTING as cast extras in a whole fabricated infotainment engagement that has EATEN America politics and leadership RAW...

This is the Selfie Generation. Everyone is a celebrity, everyone is a star, everyone has to scream their opinion at the top of their lungs, no one has to listen. There is no celebrity to be achieved in listening, being curious or asking questions or collaborating or innovating.

So yeah, the internet is essentially a caricature of that caricature.
.

I spent an hour last night cruising thru YouTube on McLuhan to see if I had a new article to write. LOL.

He got an awful lot of things horribly correct. But reading it today, you can't take it literally because of definitions of what media is now today. Some of it is academic elitism and preference for using the reason and logic side of the brain. But most of it was a quality merge of psychology and sociology and GREAT guessing.

He predicted the rise of tribalism as media got more participatory and democratic. This is the biggest "vision" in his work along with how each "medium" engages its audience. He labeled media as "hot or cold" depending on the type of vicarious experiences it could create.. A Hot medium was one that displayed works of art or completely scripted formats. Like "music radio" or "theater movies".. These could connect emotionally to people, but they stood on their own. There was no inferences to internalize because the script and content is a work in itself. Cold Media (like TV in his age) was a "stranger in your living room" and like any invited stranger, it had to behave in a certain way to SUSTAIN that invitation. So the medium of TV WAS consciously designed NOT to provoke or offend or certainly not to proselytize you into thinking about much.

It was the "cold" types of media that he feared would become interactive thru electricalization to the point, that it would have folks aligning along tribal lines to savagely butcher each other, as "tribes" generally do...

It's the human reaction to having "strangers in your living room" from an opposing tribe that's driving the constant degradation of human relations on a FULLY participatory unified internet media.. So TV is now tribalized not because it's a natural design of TV format -- but simply as a reaction to current state of dysfunction. And certain content is ONLY invited into certain living rooms and BANNED from others.

In FACT -- he got the premise of that latest Gillette Ad for toxic masculinity as he predicted that advertising would evolve to messaging that had NOTHING TO DO with the actual product. It would serve simply as a confirmation that the consumer "had made the right choice".. Because the product was just a confirmation of their "personal quest for identity"..

We're doomed I tell you... To answer your OP question directly -- It APPEARS that the number of people acting out on social media is definitely a majority. What's more important is that it's growing exponentially..

Yeah, his observations on the media were fascinating at the time, but this is just a new universe now. I'd love to see someone with expertise in the area do an analysis/projection/guess as to what he'd say today if dragged out of a time capsule.

This capacity the internet has provided to expose ourselves to, digest, and exist within our own reality has to be dangerous and destructive. I suppose I could pull together some potential positives, but I think the net effect is clearly to push us apart more and more quickly.

Still, though, this is ultimately our choice. We're being influenced, but we're NOT being FORCED.
.

 

[flacaltenn]

There sure is some truth in the above, but if you look at the OP and try to find factual content of postings even mentioned, you'd come up empty-handed. The OP concerns itself merely with the behavioral side, and singles out aggression, and muses about whether or not posters exhibit the same (aggressive) behavior in real life.

The same OP has bemoaned for years that a "Political Correctness Police" keeps people from being able to express their honest opinions.

SO what is it, people are suppressing their opinions, or people are too mean to each other? He seems to want to argue both without realizing the contradictions.

Certainly is a diff between opinions and conflict over them. Most people choose to ignore the underlying issue and just got off on the conflict part..

 

[DandyDonovan]

Yeah, Mac has a point, even while his point is thoroughly lacking in nuance. The downside is, he's taken the intellectually lazy path of discussing posters, as opposed to actual politics or policies. And that is why, for as long as I have watched him doing his shtick, he contributed exactly nothing to "human individuals sorting information and doing critical thinking".

Well there is the problem that RATIONAL folks are seeing. You kinda nailed it, but it invalidates your contention about content.

If you're gonna diss a Prez for being an ambiguous Twitter bully -- you SHOULD probably stick to issues and solutions. But that's not what happens.... Since the drama IS largely intimidation and bullying and name-calling from our "leaders" -- that's the script these "public audience" actors follow..

Don't know how many posts I've read complaining about Trumps exaggerated, appeal to emotion, tweets. But -- the folks WRITING this dialogue are meaner, more distorted and less comprehensible than what they complaining about. It's NOT an improvement.

And that's because public participation as "cast extra actors" is improv.. Not scripted. Not professionally written. And the vast majority of it is garbage and nauseating imitation..

If you EVER see posters BREAKING with the massive "cast" to write anything profound or solution directing --- PLEASE let us know...

It's Shakespeare for the masses, but demeaned by allowing the riff raff to grab a "bit part" in the play...

Ah, but you see they have justified their own behaviors by saying Trump is "so outside the norm that they MUST behave the way they do"

The adult version of "he started it"

And of course it is entirely debatable that Trump started it anyway, but that's beside the point.