The sort of posters/argument types you see on Boards

retalivity · 19-07-2015 10:50PM

Pretty sure there are threads in the mustard forum that have devolved to pool/man u bitchfests. They pop up all over the site...

hatrickpatrick · 19-07-2015 11:13PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

What ones spring to mind?

My favourites (I'm taking the piss) are the:

1. Respond to every post with a set of questions poster.
2. Pretend to be going out for drinks when loosing an argument poster
3. Disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing poster.

I just love a good argument. It's a nice adrenaline substitute for when I'm too lazy to go to the gym.

obezyana · 19-07-2015 11:23PM

I dislike posters who end their post with their username.....Its like they think no one can see their username so they leave it at the end of every post. Another one is all the idiots over in the radio forums who whinge about certain radio shows.... its like they dont realise they can move the fu#king dial. Oh and one more.......those sigs at the end of a persons post, what the hell are they in aid of?

Taco Chips · 19-07-2015 11:31PM

conorh91 wrote: »

I'd say about half of this thread is made up of not so thinly veiled references.

Whatever the boards equivalent of subtweeting is.

One of the commonest issues here is of people ridiculing the expression 'PC brigade', despite the fact that there is a group (brigade if you will) of people who will always be the first to reject uncomfortable truths in specific areas, e.g. immigration, asylum, the church and abortion.

When you see a thread on any of these topics it's easy to predict who's participating with the same stock responses.

Just like the 'brigade' of commonly seen posters who are always front and centre when it comes to professing some "uncomfortable truths". You know, the people who seem to take great pride in "saying it like it is" and "being unPC but it's true" usually while spouting awful generalisations, thinly veiled phobias of every nature and other crudely formed opinions. They're always complaining about people calling them out on their bull**** too along the lines of "just because I said **disgusting uninformed comment** doesn't mean I'm a **_phobe/ist** etc...

Richard Hillman · 19-07-2015 11:55PM

"Well, if it's in <insert media source> then it must be true :rolleyes:"

I think this should fall under the don't be a dick policy.

conorh91 · 20-07-2015 12:10AM

Taco Chips wrote: »

Just like the 'brigade' of commonly seen posters who are always front and centre when it comes to professing some "uncomfortable truths". You know, the people who seem to take great pride in "saying it like it is" and "being unPC but it's true" usually while spouting awful generalisations, thinly veiled phobias of every nature and other crudely formed opinions. They're always complaining about people calling them out on their bull**** too along the lines of "just because I said **disgusting uninformed comment** doesn't mean I'm a **_phobe/ist** etc...

Yeah, that happens too. "I'm not racist/ homophobic, but.…"

That's easily spotted too.

Not sure with what it has to do with my post. Just because i think there's a very predictable and vocal PC brigade doesn't mean I endorse the "I'm not a racist, but…" side.

One is equally as blinkered and insulated as the other. I think it's interesting you think I take the one side just because I criticized the other in that post. I've been on both sides of most of those debates like immigration and abortion and so on.

Most normal people don't take the same pre-set opinion on every topic.

Taco Chips · 20-07-2015 12:13AM

conorh91 wrote: »

Yeah, that happens too. "I'm not racist/ homophobic, but.…"

That's easily spotted too.

Not sure with what it has to do with my post. Just because i think there's a very predictable and vocal PC brigade doesn't mean I endorse the "I'm not a racist, but…" side.

One is equally as blinkered and insulated as the other. I think it's interesting you think I take the one side just because I criticized the other in that post. I've been on both sides of most of those debates like immigration and abortion and so on.

Most normal people don't take the same pre-set opinion on every topic.

Well why wouldn't I think you were endorsing one side when you only criticised the other one in your first post? Pretty reasonable assumption in fairness.

Even if you break it down, I think it's a much better trait to be quick to stick up for marginalised groups with a lot of zeal and be called a social justice warrior than to be on the other side. So I don't really agree with your assessment that one is bad as another.

Junkyard Tom · 20-07-2015 12:20AM

Posters who don't finish their

RDM_83 again · 20-07-2015 12:20AM

osarusan wrote: »

Perhaps it is because, despite you thinking that both sides are equally blinkered and insulated, you only mentioned one side in that post.

:-\ his post wasn't refencing the brigades themselves, it was referencing the fact that there is always post denying the existence of the "pc brigade", I've not seen equivalent posts denying the other side exists.

My one will be people who think Ireland is exactly the same as 20/30 years ago where the church runs everything, there's no multiculturism and homosexuality is locked firmly in the closet

conorh91 · 20-07-2015 12:25AM

Taco Chips wrote: »

Well why wouldn't I think you were endorsing one side when you only criticised the other one in your first post? Pretty reasonable assumption in fairness.

Look this is a thread on the internet about things you see on boards, we're not being asked to give exhaustive answers, just maybe throw out a couple of observations……. jeez are you pursuing anyone else's post to ask them why they didn't also mention X, Y, and Z? Get over it.

Taco Chips · 20-07-2015 12:35AM

conorh91 wrote: »

Look this is a thread on the internet about things you see on boards, we're not being asked to give exhaustive answers, just maybe throw out a couple of observations……. jeez are you pursuing anyone else's post to ask them why they didn't also mention X, Y, and Z? Get over it.

I'm not pursuing you, relax. I replied to your original post. I didn't even attribute anything mentioned directly to you i.e, I didn't imply you were on one side or another, I was just discussing the other side.

Robsweezie · 20-07-2015 12:36AM

If their username is an innuendo or reference to some sort of illegal activity, chances are they're gonna be trouble.

How Soon Is Now · 20-07-2015 12:38AM

The ones who think there experts on certain subjects and when ever theres a thread about it they come flying in and take over.

Posters who use there gender or sexual orientation to win arguments or control a subject being discussed.

Tony Beetroot · 20-07-2015 01:12AM

How Soon Is Now wrote: »

The ones who think there experts on certain subjects and when ever theres a thread about it they come flying in and take over.

Any hint of Donegal and the backwards man posts in it.

Mint Aero · 20-07-2015 06:08AM

The genuinely curious crowd :rolleyes:

They come on with some painfully obvious and usually irrelevant question then slap genuinely curious on at the end.

I always imagine the poster sitting in front of their computer with their legs crossed incase they wet themselves with anticipation of someone answering their genuinely curious question exactly the way they hoped so they can then proceed with their argument.

It's hilarious when no one answers because that's their argument failed and over but like ants who've dropped a leaf they'll do whatever they can to set up the exact same question again to someone else until someone answers the way they want and they'll make their worthless and obvious comment.

the groutch · 20-07-2015 08:25AM

Shinnerbashers

lanos · 20-07-2015 10:38AM

i have noticed a lot of posters who love arguing for the sake of arguing and they have all the terminology
Strawman
Logical Falacy
Ad hominem

d1ckheads

lanos · 20-07-2015 10:41AM

eviltwin wrote: »

The type who blame everything on Enda Kenny

you mean people who are anti-FG

as opposed to FG supporters (like you)

Carlos Orange · 20-07-2015 10:45AM

Posters who tell you what you mean.

Satriale · 20-07-2015 10:52AM

psinno wrote: »

Posters who tell you what you mean.

By that, you mean dickheads.

PandaPoo · 20-07-2015 11:20AM

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Posters who don't finish their

Dinner?

Junkyard Tom · 20-07-2015 06:36PM

PandaPoo wrote: »

Dinner?

No the ones who don't complete their

Junkyard Tom · 20-07-2015 06:38PM

the groutch wrote: »

Shinnerbashers

Bashing people for their political party loyalties is one thing - sneering at people because they're of a nationalist persuasion is quite another and there are a few on here who seem to revel in the latter.

Duckjob · 20-07-2015 07:52PM

1) The "walking rulebook" types that have to give a moral pronouncement based on a several line account of a situation, and that pronouncement is usually just quoting a rule from the rulebook without addressing any of the other rights or wrongs of the situation described.

Obviously made-up example:
Poster: I was driving down the road last week, doing 62kph in a 60 zone. A garda car pulled me over and the guy shoved me up against the wall, started shouting abuse into my face, then left saying if he ever caught me speeding again he would find my family and murder them.

Walking rulebook: You were speeding.

2) The "wonderfully pithy remark" contributor: The type that even when they have nothing to contribute to the topic of the thread, can't fathom that the thread might be better off without their wonderfully pithy remark. The worse part is the remarks are usually jaded internet jokes/memes that have been around since 2001.

lanos · 21-07-2015 02:31AM

Duckjob wrote: »

1) The "walking rulebook" types

Walking rulebooks
brilliant
did you invent this yourself

if so, well done.....I fcuking hate these people.

Dimithy · 21-07-2015 02:51AM

The King of Moo wrote: »

People who generalise about people who disagree with them.

They're all the same. Bunch of bastards.

Cold War Kid · 21-07-2015 08:21AM

These threads are always so negative. The very nice, funny, intelligent people.

the_syco · 21-07-2015 08:34AM

steddyeddy wrote: »

3. Disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing poster.

Do you have links of said poster, and also a cert of their sanity?

R.D. aka MR.D · 21-07-2015 08:58AM

I really dislike how some people can't possibly imagine that someone might not feel exactly the way they do about a situation.

I often wonder if they live in a little bubble or possibly in strange small village where everyone is exactly alike with the same thoughts and feelings.

It's just bizarre.

Flippant example: Poster 1: 'I don't like the taste of carrots'
Poster 2: 'You are wrong. You can't think that. It's totally impossible that someone doesn't like carrots.'

5rtytry56 · 21-07-2015 10:31AM

R.D. aka MR.D wrote: »

Flippant example: Poster 1: 'I don't like the taste of carrots'
Poster 2: 'You are wrong. '

Poster 2:'There is something wrong with people like Poster 1:. They have some serious technophobia'

This is seen in discussions about payment transactions here on boards.

The sort of posters/argument types you see on Boards

Comments