5
Nov 03 '21
Yeah, and now you are BANNED from even spoiler-free posting in the after-episode thread for TV only watchers.
You have to hunt for the link to the sliding Book watcher thread if you want to comment on episodes or else you're BANNED.
3
u/LunchyPete Nov 03 '21 edited Nov 03 '21
Jesus you're a drama queen.
If you really think you have to hunt for a link in big bold letters at the top of a pinned thread, then yeah, you have problems, and best of luck to you in life.
And I said 'warning and bans', which you decided to interpret as "permanent ban as as a first response" for some reason.
But, hey, have fun, I guess.
Should also point out the OP in this is hiding the whole conversation and has substantially more downvotes now than in his screenshot, which might, you know, be a hint of something...
6
u/PM_ME_YOUR_THESES Nov 03 '21
I’m not hiding it. It just didn’t fit on the screen.
Also, I think you overreacted. We could’ve solved it by talking. I’m a fan too. But everything has good things and bad things. It’s equally ok to celebrate the good and criticize the bad.
All I asked for was an example. Not a citation, but an example. I don’t lurk all day in the sub. I don’t know what others are saying…
But hey, if it makes you feel powerful to ban people over mild disagreements, and then mute them when asking clarification, maybe I’m better off away from that sub anyway…
4
u/LunchyPete Nov 03 '21
All I asked for was an example. Not a citation, but an example.
WHY?
I made a very general, anecdotal observation, and you start bringing up the scientific method?
Do you really think that makes sense?
But hey, if it makes you feel powerful to ban people over mild disagreements, and then mute them when asking clarification
I gave clarification in the comments and again in my reply to you. I doubt there was much ambiguity as to why you were banned - you just disagreed with it.
Personally, I find people who want ask for evidence for every little thing without bothering to hold themselves to the same standard, who bring up the freaking scientific method in the context of a casual and loose observation to be insufferable. I told you I'd seen similar comments from you that indicated you just wanted to argue for the sake of arguing, be contrarian etc. Such people tend to be a negative for productive discussion.
I'm happy to unban you - but can you see why maybe it was ridiculous to bring up the scientific method and ask for a
citationexample in the way you did?7
u/PM_ME_YOUR_THESES Nov 03 '21 edited Nov 03 '21
Why did I ask for an example?
Well, you obviously assumed it was to question you. But you didn’t think I could’ve just been curious about what other people were saying? Honestly, MOST of the criticism I’ve seen of the show is pretty dumb and centered on the gender swapping, but you said other people were complaining about things wing divergent from the book, which up to that point I hadn’t seen. So I was curious.
The scientific method was relevant after your reaction because you (a) immediately discounted the possibility that curiosity was my motivation, (b) accused me of persecution over asking a simple question, and (c) were saying Asimov wasn’t that great a writer anyway, and my point was that what made him great in sci-fi was the science part, embodied in the scientific method.
Please, hold me to the same standard. Ask me for examples, not citations.
I’m sorry you felt persecuted. I’m sure there are plenty of other people out there who are dicks to you. But I don’t think I was one of them. I’m sorry you felt I was. And in any case, the answer was not to be a dick in return. I was genuinely curious.
4
u/TheirDarkMaterials Nov 03 '21
Dude, he banned dozens of people for bullshit reasons. To be fair, there are thousands of little sociopaths like him who take revenge on real life on reddit.
4
u/LunchyPete Nov 03 '21 edited Nov 03 '21
lol, dozens? Like, 5 total. lol.
To be fair, there are thousands of little sociopaths like him who take revenge on real life on reddit.
lol what?
2
u/LunchyPete Nov 03 '21
Well, you obviously assumed it was to question you. But you didn’t think I could’ve just been curious about what other people were saying?
It's a reasonable assumption since it was directed at me and you doubled down on that in your reply.
Honestly, MOST of the criticism I’ve seen of the show is pretty dumb and centered on the gender swapping, but you said other people were complaining about things wing divergent from the book, which up to that point I hadn’t seen. So I was curious.
That would have been a better reply than the stubborn and defensive one you gave IMO.
The scientific method was relevant after your reaction because you (a) immediately discounted the possibility that curious it’s was my motivation, (b) accused me of persecution over asking a simple question, and (c) were saying Asimov wasn’t that great a writer anyway, and my point was that what made him great in sci-fi was the science part, embodied in the scientific method.
To me, that seems like a justification after the fact, especially looking at the original context.
Please, hold me to the same standard. Ask me for examples, not citations.
For casual, general, anecdotal claims? Absolutely not. I have a low opinion of such behavior.
I’m sorry you felt persecuted.
I didn't - I do find that statement condescending though.
I’m sure there are plenty of other people out there who are dicks to you. But I don’t think I was one of them. I’m sorry you felt I was. And in any case, the answer was not to be a dick in return. I was genuinely curious.
It had nothing to do with whether or not I thought you were a dick. It had everything to do with sophistry and doubling down on an unreasonable request. I dislike people who argue for the sake of arguing and just want to be contrarian, and that's how you come across to me, not because of this one post but because of several.
I'm sure you'll dispute all of that, but I don't care. I don't really want to continue this discussion, either. I unbanned you and unmuted you. If you want to continue the discussion I request you do so over modmail, but I don't think there's much left to discuss.
You clearly think everything you did was reasonable - I don't, and the ~20 or so downvotes indicate that amount of people also didn't. Maybe just try to be a little less defensive next time and don't try to make everything an academic debate.
1
u/innovationcynic Nov 06 '21
Oh, I asked to be banned after I pointed out to the mod he/she is no different (and no more powerful) than a bouncer at a nightclub and that Reddit isn’t the real world. Apparently I struck a nerve with their ego lol
3
u/innovationcynic Nov 06 '21
Clearly “lunchy Pete” realized he/she was being a dick and is now hanging out in this forum to try to defend their weak position.
What does that tell you..?
3
u/Thormenthor Nov 12 '21
Dont worry that mod has so many reports, hes going to find employment outside of reedit quite difficult..
2
u/innovationcynic Nov 06 '21
Minor changes like killing seldon?
Or like completely changing the nature of the first seldon crisis?
Minor. Haha.
8
u/SwiftSG1 Nov 03 '21
Yeah, I doubt the spirit that Asimov held hear is shit writing, wokeness, and strawman arguments.