Comments by "Cinderball" (@cinderball1135) on "Furious Drunk Trumpist WILL NOT APOLOGIZE" video.

  1. Is he the same guy who often replies to these videos in the comment sections and starts arguments there as well? Or does some other troll just use him as a pseudonym?
    9
  2. To be fair, from his point of view, I doubt he takes his views seriously, like you or I might. It's just a lifestyle choice - a trend that he's wearing right now, to see if it fits. People like that will "believe" anything that gets a reaction, I think.
    5
  3. In that case, I get the distinct impression he's on a different plane from "serious" discourse. He's not quite joking, but he's not quite serious either - it's as though he's trying on controversial opinions for the sheer unadulterated hell of it - not out of any wish to make the world a better place. I guess that's where people like me go wrong in trying to have a conversation with him. We're always at a disadvantage, because we have something to lose, and he doesn't. I guess, in a really round-about way, I've discovered the meaning of the sentence "don't feed the trolls".
    3
  4. It's a cliché because it's common, not because it's rare. There are really people like that out there.  nick m. 
    2
  5. I'm curious - did you make up that moniker just now, or is this actually a group of people that meets and converses off-site somewhere? Do you actually know Jimmy?  @demarcusblack1328 
    1
  6. Interesting, I wondered why we kept seeing such a common lingo among the various trolls who show up to David's videos - now I think I see the source. So why exactly do you consume David's content and write comments here as well? Surely Mr Hard Bastard has you covered? And when exactly was Mr. HB a leftie? From what I can tell, his content has been exclusively hard-right for some considerable amount of time now.  @demarcusblack1328 
    1
  7. So it doesn't actually sound as though he was ever really sure of his politics - and may still not be. When you've gone through serious trauma like that - I mean, the JWs are just this side of being an out-and-out cult - I'm not sure politics is the best medicine for anybody to be taking. It can feel cathartic to go on a rampage against "the man", but for those of us trying in good faith to make the world a better place, people like that are landmines to be avoided. All of what I've seen of him and his fans reinforces this feeling I've had from the start - these are not people who are well-informed about politics, or about how the game is played, for the most part. They have valid critiques, on many occasions, and they're good at poking holes - but they're not so very good at offering a better alternative - and they don't seem to know the art of sensitivity - the importance of not offending everybody in the room for no good reason. I mean, the first rule of politics, after all, is that you need more than 50% to put yourself over the top, and that often means breaking bread with your enemies, in order to get something done for the collective benefit of everybody. Calling them rude names and starting fights in comment sections isn't going to add much to the 30% pile you started with. I appreciate the chance to learn a little bit about the inside of the other man's bubble though - it's not very often we can reach across the aisle and have a serious exchange of information, so for that much at least I'm grateful.   @demarcusblack1328 
    1
  8.  @demarcusblack1328  On the contrary, I see right-wingers acting offended all the darn time. Like for instance, when I said "the other man's bubble", I was really just using it as a turn of phrase to describe bridging two completely opposite points of view. You decided to take it for a spin in the offend-o-mobile.
    1
  9.  @demarcusblack1328  You're using all the right terminology, but you seem to have a very hard-and-fast, very unilateral understanding of what you think "The Left" is like. Leftists are a very, very broad church. There are extremists, sure, but they're fairly few and far between, and you seem unable to distinguish between Marxists, Social Democrats, Liberals and your garden variety nice guys who just like healthcare. That's my fundamental point here. You seem to have pivoted to an extremely combative stance in our conversation just now, which I find rather strange. Are you 100% sure I'm the offended person here, or are you getting upset because I might possibly be touching a nerve?
    1
  10. I'm rather disappointed the conversation has gone this way, though sadly unsurprised. I'm not especially interested in the kind of conversation where I try to say something, and you bounce it right back at me. ("No u!!!") I would simply challenge you on your assertion that "all left-wing people are easily offended" and that "not giving a shit" about causing offence is a valid stance. It seems, at the end of the day, that you guys "don't give a shit" about an awful lot other than scoring points in debates. Your facts (like the idea that right-wingers don't have a social media bubble) don't pass muster, and it seems like a waste of time to fact-check them, because no matter how many garbage claims one debunks, another three or four will emerge to take their place - and that's assuming I can find any legitimate sources that you won't also try to disqualify. If what you want to do is chalk up wins in amateur debates, then mission accomplished - it's just terribly easy to "win" by that metric, since all that's required is to assert that somebody's irrational, overemotional, illogical or what have you, and then immediately declare victory before they can respond. Roll on the up-votes and the "You go guy!" comments from your chums. It's just that with that behaviour, no information has changed hands, no new agreements have been established. If you want people to take you seriously, stop launching accusations and name-calling (no matter how justified you might feel) - because right then and there, the discourse stops. Bear in mind that with a username like yours, the fact that I'm treating you with any respect at all is a kindness. If you want to keep receiving that kind of kindness, you'd better show some respect yourself. All I can hope, in conclusion, is that you'll some day climb down from your high horse, and engage in civil conversations (like the one we'd had in our first couple of messages!) which may prove more fruitful than the mess you've accomplished towards the end.  @demarcusblack1328 
    1
  11. Your positions, one by one. 1) "I don't care about people getting offended, least of all me. I only care about what is correct, factual & true." - This is objectively false. Your "facts" throughout our conversations have been wild oversimplifications at best, fictitious at worst. You seem to straight-up make things up out of thin air (like the all leftists are easily offended children!) kind of guff we talked about earlier, and then mysteriously forgot about. Meanwhile, feelings are important, believe it or not. Should we therefore throw out all the science that people dislike and bow to anti-Vaxxers? Hell no. But if you want to engage in political discussions, we have to acknowledge that feelings and opinions carry real weight. 2) Your "refutation" of my point, that right-wingers have a problem with social media bubbles, was to provide me with three examples of social media bubbles that right-wingers might be found using. 3) On the subject of your username, I'm not here to defend older men having child brides (although applying modern ethics to historical figures is a bit of a rum game - by that standard, Abraham Lincoln would be chewed out for the racist that he was - even though by the standards of his time he was a great man) - but leaving all that aside, I am going to point out that the only possible reason to select that kind of name for your profile is because you want to advertise your edginess. 4) I already told you I'm done with this conversation. You are getting no further replies, as I smell a troll here, and I've given you more than enough nosh for one night. :)  @demarcusblack1328 
    1
  12. See, your debating technique needs work. 1) You decided that I was all over the place, and thus excused yourself the work of reading what I said - then declared victory anyway. That wouldn't fly in a properly moderated debate. 2) Your framing here is really weird. You first told me that all bubbles are on the left side of politics - then provided examples of right wing bubbles - then justified THOSE with the idea that "the establishment" is coming down hard on those people (for reasons which are not elaborated upon, but we're going to just paste in the blanks with "creepy and illicit"). I'd like to briefly posit a counter-hypothesis to your implied conspiracy theory about your allies being unfairly persecuted: those circles are being clamped down on for very good reasons - first and foremost, they're harbouring actual, live domestic terrorists, and they're sharing illegal content such as child pornography. There's no mystery here, no dark cabal of evil Establishment types. It's pretty open and shut. They're breaking the law, violating web providers' terms of service, so they're being punished accordingly. Good night. :)  @demarcusblack1328 
    1
  13. Just addressing that first comment in your string of five replies (?) - you honestly believe that upsetting your opponent is a sign that you won the debate?  @demarcusblack1328  And to close, I brought up the child porn thing because, clearly you don't like it either, so you should surely understand why law enforcement and web companies would be making haste to shut it down, and would laud them for doing so. Are their efforts perfect and have they cottoned on to all the hives of villainy that the web has to offer? Surely not. But that's a monumental undertaking, and starting with the most prominent s-holes seems like a great place to start. If that affects friends of yours, however, perhaps this is a sign you need to keep better company?
    1
  14. No thanks, I think I've heard enough to understand what's going on here. :) @demarcusblack1328 
    1
  15. No thanks, if you guys really are chomping at the bit to start another civil war, you're exactly the violent extremists I had you pegged for, and I have better things to do with my time.
    1
  16. ​ @demarcusblack1328  Your defence sounds a lot like "She was asking for it"; a time-honoured favourite of drink-addled men on trial for murdering their wives with a golf trophy. Is this really the look you want to wear? You need to take a breath. Step offline for a while, taste the air, take up a hobby, make some friends.
    1
  17. ​ @demarcusblack1328  No. The violence is coming entirely from your friends and associates. The left didn't kill a woman at Charlottesville - the left didn't instigate a mass shooting in Christchurch - the left didn't claim responsibility for multiple school shootings - the left didn't suggest it was okay to "knock the crap" out of protestors at a political rally. We're done here. Conversation muted.
    1