• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Spamming/Baiting/Trolling and "TDS"

Status
Not open for further replies.

markjs

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 25, 2016
Messages
3,833
Reaction score
1,610
Location
Port Hadlock, WA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
I've been infracted now for calling someones post (or thinking behind it) "delusional". Apparently it speaks to mental state and is against the rules, fine, lesson learned but it cost me a two week suspension. Considering if I wanna go back upstairs at all, but no big on that, the rule is the rule.

What bothers me is the frequent use of "TDS" or "Trump hate" to dismiss folks. In my mind it's exactly the same as calling another poster's post "delusional". "Deranged", or "derangement", are both mighty close. It's implying that anyone who dislikes the president, does so for irrational reasons, and is mentally "deranged" it's a personal attack and I think it should be an infraction if it's not. I see some posters post it several times a day. It really adds nothing to the discussion.

On that note, I'd like also to ask does "insane" qualify? Insane is not an actual mental helth term, it's legal one. Anyway, don't wanna split hairs or complain about my situation, now I know, but I think "TDS" out to be banned when aimed at other posters. If "snowflake" isn't ok, and I hear it isn't than neither shoud be TDS. Thanks
 
:inandout:
 
Ooops. I almost scoffed at someone's claim of sanity about 15 minutes ago.

Glad I held back.
 
Ooops. I almost scoffed at someone's claim of sanity about 15 minutes ago.

Glad I held back.

Do you disagree that it's essentially the exact tsame thing?
 
I've been infracted now for calling someones post (or thinking behind it) "delusional". Apparently it speaks to mental state and is against the rules, fine, lesson learned but it cost me a two week suspension. Considering if I wanna go back upstairs at all, but no big on that, the rule is the rule.

What bothers me is the frequent use of "TDS" or "Trump hate" to dismiss folks. In my mind it's exactly the same as calling another poster's post "delusional". "Deranged", or "derangement", are both mighty close. It's implying that anyone who dislikes the president, does so for irrational reasons, and is mentally "deranged" it's a personal attack and I think it should be an infraction if it's not. I see some posters post it several times a day. It really adds nothing to the discussion.

On that note, I'd like also to ask does "insane" qualify? Insane is not an actual mental helth term, it's legal one. Anyway, don't wanna split hairs or complain about my situation, now I know, but I think "TDS" out to be banned when aimed at other posters. If "snowflake" isn't ok, and I hear it isn't than neither shoud be TDS. Thanks
I think moderation makes a distinction between referring to a thought as delusional, and calling someone delusional, and that might have been where you ran into a problem.
 
Do you disagree that it's essentially the exact tsame thing?
You're wrong, it isn't the same thing.

Saying someone has "TDS" is way across those lines.
 
I've been infracted now for calling someones post (or thinking behind it) "delusional". Apparently it speaks to mental state and is against the rules, fine, lesson learned but it cost me a two week suspension. Considering if I wanna go back upstairs at all, but no big on that, the rule is the rule.

What bothers me is the frequent use of "TDS" or "Trump hate" to dismiss folks. In my mind it's exactly the same as calling another poster's post "delusional". "Deranged", or "derangement", are both mighty close. It's implying that anyone who dislikes the president, does so for irrational reasons, and is mentally "deranged" it's a personal attack and I think it should be an infraction if it's not. I see some posters post it several times a day. It really adds nothing to the discussion.

On that note, I'd like also to ask does "insane" qualify? Insane is not an actual mental helth term, it's legal one. Anyway, don't wanna split hairs or complain about my situation, now I know, but I think "TDS" out to be banned when aimed at other posters. If "snowflake" isn't ok, and I hear it isn't than neither shoud be TDS. Thanks

Red:
  • Did you call the post or the person delusional? The distinction is subtle but important.
  • Was your remark summary or argumentative in nature. I don't much cotton to summary declarations, but if someone can present a sound/cogent case that a given reamark demonstrates a specific quality -- be it delusion, intellectual indolence, general ignorance of basic (i.e., stuff one is taught in high school or before) knowledge, and/or failure to to apply sound logic -- I wouldn't take exception with it. Of course, the declarative description one levies must comport with what one can show.
 
I think moderation makes a distinction between referring to a thought as delusional, and calling someone delusional, and that might have been where you ran into a problem.

I'll go back and look at it, you could be right.

Saying someone has TDS though, is an attack, period. It's claiming that the only way they could dislike Trump as president is if they are somehow flawed in their thinking. It's an attack, and it's freely used with impunity by some posters AFAIK. I realize I can't necessarily know if they get infracted, but from the sheer volume of posts by some posters using it, I HIGHLY doubt anyone has been
 
You're wrong, it isn't the same thing.

Saying someone has "TDS" is way across those lines.

Even when it is so often accurate and halts debate faster than someone saying God told me? I don't know how many ti,especially hysterical folks have disliked my view and started screaming Trump despite my numerous posts denouncing himy and many of his practices. Hell, a red hats equals a white hood and anyone with a considered opinion that disagrees is just another trumpster. TDS is a sickness and I hate to mock it, but I mocked ODS so it's only fair
 
"TDS" is a widespread figure of speech.

Before TDS, there was ODS. Before that BDS.

Trump has accused others of having TDS. I've accused Trump of having ODS.

Trying to get rid of such accusations as a response on a political forum would be challenging and I wouldn't take it on.
 
Red:
  • Did you call the post or the person delusional? The distinction is subtle but important.
  • Was your remark summary or argumentative in nature. I don't much cotton to summary declarations, but if someone can present a sound/cogent case that a given reamark demonstrates a specific quality -- be it delusion, intellectual indolence, general ignorance of basic (i.e., stuff one is taught in high school or before) knowledge, and/or failure to to apply sound logic -- I wouldn't take exception with it. Of course, the declarative description one levies must comport with what one can show.

The thing is, I'm not really arguing that I shouldn't have been infracted, I'm fine that I was. I just don't think TDS thrown freely at all of us who dislike the president should be a constant bludgeon.
 
Even when it is so often accurate and halts debate faster than someone saying God told me? I don't know how many ti,especially hysterical folks have disliked my view and started screaming Trump despite my numerous posts denouncing himy and many of his practices. Hell, a red hats equals a white hood and anyone with a considered opinion that disagrees is just another trumpster. TDS is a sickness and I hate to mock it, but I mocked ODS so it's only fair
It's troll baiting when directed at another poster, pure and simple.
 
I'll go back and look at it, you could be right.

Saying someone has TDS though, is an attack, period. It's claiming that the only way they could dislike Trump as president is if they are somehow flawed in their thinking. It's an attack, and it's freely used with impunity by some posters AFAIK. I realize I can't necessarily know if they get infracted, but from the sheer volume of posts by some posters using it, I HIGHLY doubt anyone has been
It's probably not getting reported enough, either.
 
The thing is, I'm not really arguing that I shouldn't have been infracted, I'm fine that I was. I just don't think TDS thrown freely at all of us who dislike the president should be a constant bludgeon.

Oh, okay. So your issue is about equanimity of rule enforcement. I haven't anything to say about that.
 
Oh, okay. So your issue is about equanimity of rule enforcement. I haven't anything to say about that.

I really need to go back and look but IIRC I think my post was sorta "on the fence stuff" but ya know depending somone coulda called it either way. I think I've said worse and not got dinged but I did so just try not to again I suppose.
 
It's troll baiting when directed at another poster, pure and simple.

I assume you are agreeing with me and saying things like trumpeter and such are just baiting sinice reality doesn't play a part.
 
The "D" in all forms stands for deranged, mad, insane.
 
I've been infracted now for calling someones post (or thinking behind it) "delusional". Apparently it speaks to mental state and is against the rules, fine, lesson learned but it cost me a two week suspension. Considering if I wanna go back upstairs at all, but no big on that, the rule is the rule.

What bothers me is the frequent use of "TDS" or "Trump hate" to dismiss folks. In my mind it's exactly the same as calling another poster's post "delusional". "Deranged", or "derangement", are both mighty close. It's implying that anyone who dislikes the president, does so for irrational reasons, and is mentally "deranged" it's a personal attack and I think it should be an infraction if it's not. I see some posters post it several times a day. It really adds nothing to the discussion.

On that note, I'd like also to ask does "insane" qualify? Insane is not an actual mental helth term, it's legal one. Anyway, don't wanna split hairs or complain about my situation, now I know, but I think "TDS" out to be banned when aimed at other posters. If "snowflake" isn't ok, and I hear it isn't than neither shoud be TDS. Thanks
What about "Trump cultist"? Or "Trumpoid", etc.


As far as Trump hate - when various people say "I hate Trump . . ." what should be done.
 
I assume you are agreeing with me and saying things like trumpeter and such are just baiting sinice reality doesn't play a part.
Haven't heard that one.
 
What about "Trump cultist"? Or "Trumpoid", etc.


As far as Trump hate - when various people say "I hate Trump . . ." what should be done.
Are you guys even bothering to read the thread?

One can say whatever they want about the state of politics. If you want to say that "liberals have TDS and I hate them!", you're perfectly free to do so. But, when you direct those same attacks to users on this forum, you've crossed a llne.
 
I assume you are agreeing with me and saying things like trumpeter and such are just baiting sinice reality doesn't play a part.

IDK that it is the same. A lot of folks are Trump fans, we hate it and can't see why they support him, we think theyre wrong. Now saying someone is a Trump cultist, now that is the same.
 
Do you disagree that it's essentially the exact tsame thing?
Was this your first infraction? A two week suspension for a first time seems excessive.
 
Auto correct. Any flame on Trump supporters applies tho
Well, yeah, flaming is flaming.

But it has to be directed at a user(s) to break a rule, if I understand them correctly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom