It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why the big fuss over secrecy?

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 07:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Colloneh7
You guys gleefully high-fived yourselves right past my insertion of William Morgan twice.


Well, the whole Morgan thing has been done to death here over the past few years. There's only so much one can say about it, and all the posts can be found in the archives.

Personally, I think Morgan was a scoundrel. I also believe that he faked his death, just like he faked being a Mason. You can read about it here.


And the line about freemasonry not involved in politics is laughable. (see Secret Architecture of Washington, DC or Secret Mysteries of America's Beginnings - THE LINKS ARE ABOVE)


Well, I think your links are laughable, so I guess that's that.




posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 09:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Masonic Light
Personally, I think Morgan was a scoundrel. I also believe that he faked his death, just like he faked being a Mason.


Well, seeing as you've been biased thus far, I would not expect a different answer coming from you. Freemasons "disappeared" Morgan, and yet (according to you) he is the scoudrel and a "fake" mason, who faked his death, long before Elvis thought of it.



Now, it is documented that in 1825 he was recieved into the York Rite Royal Arch Degree at Leroy, N.Y. on 31/5/1825, in the Western Star Chapter no. 33.

www.freemasons-freemasonry.com...

I stand corrected. Freemasons have never, ever, ever done anything wrong. People who meet in secret behind closed doors, practice occult rituals, and swear blood oaths of secrecy and to never betray another member under the threat of death, are just your run of the mill, average everday nice people. It's all harmless. I understand now. I forgot that Freemasonry is like a Christmas present, as another user in this thread explained.


William Morgan's "martyrdom" was so important in American politics at that time that it created America's first 3rd party which included the likes of John Quincy Adams:

www.associatedcontent.com...


Well, I think your links are laughable, so I guess that's that.


You mean the permanent links atop the ATS website? I suppose you then think ATS links are laughable. You are on a roll.

Do I think that freemasons run the world? No, I don't. Do I think they are an arm of the powers that be that run the world? Yes, I do, but more so in past history. I find a problem with the organisation's structure, which is far from the harmless portrayal of Shriner's hospitals and the other yahoo what-have-you's. Ah, the art of philanthropy; do the good deeds in a very public manner, so that you can get away with the dirty deeds behind closed doors, and everyone's happy, right? And no, I'm not saying that every freemasonry meeting is centered around plotting conspiracies against outsiders, but freemasonry sure is structured for exactly that.



posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 09:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Colloneh7
And the line about freemasonry not involved in politics is laughable...Freemasons were also involved in the French Revolution.


I think the key here is the different nouns used in each claim:

"Freemasonry", as used in the first accusation, refers to the organization.

"Freemasons", as used in the second accusation, refers to the individuals that are a part of the organization.

It's no secret that Freemasons have not been involved in politics, as some Masons themselves even seem to use this as a "marketing ploy" sometimes. That in and of itself suggests no secret conspiracy though. A lot of politicians have been Christians, too, does that suggest a Christian conspiracy?

Okay, bad example.


But merely stating that Freemasons have been involved in politics does not prove that Freemasonry has. However, I also find it hard to swallow that anyone could believe that the Freemasons who have been involved in politics did not use the influence Freemasonry has had on them in their political careers. If a man who is a Freemason designs the layout of Washington D.C. and incorporates symbols from Freemasonry, it in no way proves that Freemasonry as an organization has some secret motive for the design.

However, this fact also does nothing to prove that they don't.

[edit on 30/7/07 by an3rkist]



posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 04:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Colloneh7
You guys gleefully high-fived yourselves right past my insertion of William Morgan twice.


Probably because the William Morgan Affair has been hashed over 483,729,615 times on this forum already and I'm sure you are capable of using the search function. I know that almost every Mason on this thread has chimed in on it more than once.

It's funny how you guys love to talk about William Morgan like that kind of stuff happens everyday... if Freemasonry were as bad as you make it out to be, wouldn't there be more "incidents" such as this one? I'm not going to go into specifics about Morgan. I say again, use the search function; it is your friend.


Whether he was or wasn't a Mason, whether he faked his death or not, and whether a handful of stupid overzealous Masons knocked him off or not, I really don't care. We're talking about the fraternity as an institution, not about the various misdeeds and shortcomings of individual Masons throughout history. Either way though, the Morgan affair is an isolated incident; hardly indicative of Masonry as a whole, or modern Masons, for that matter.


And the line about freemasonry not involved in politics is laughable. (see Secret Architecture of Washington, DC or Secret Mysteries of America's Beginnings - THE LINKS ARE ABOVE)


*yawn*

Been there, done that too. You seem to be failing to recognize the difference between "Freemasonry" and "Freemasons." Were Freemasons involved in the design of D.C.? Yup. Was the fraternity itself behind it? My magic 8-ball says no...


Freemasons were also involved in the French Revolution.


Yes, they were. Note the word Freemasons, not Freemasonry. Again, you are trying to assign responsibility for the actions or attitudes of individuals to the fraternity itself. It does not work that way.


I don't know from what point you are trying to argue to say that freemasonry isn't involved in politics.


From the point that Freemasonry itself holds no positions on the matter, neither expressed nor implied.


There is a thread in this section which discusses Freemasons and Politics.


Glad you found that.
You'll see that the answers are pretty much the same no matter where the discussion pops up.


It is useless for me to debate with people who are obviously bent on asserting their misinformed viewpoint onto me, whilst completely ignoring any point that I raise and insert into the debate. Have a nice day.


Likewise, it is assumedly pointless for me to discuss it with you, seeing as your preconceived notions and crap you dredged up on the internet seem to have made up your mind about us already anyway.

And a good day to you sir.

[edit on 7/30/07 by The Axeman]



posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 04:40 PM
link   
*sorry*

[edit on 7/30/07 by The Axeman]



posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 04:40 PM
link   
*sorry*

[edit on 7/30/07 by The Axeman]



posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 09:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by brotherforchrist

Business model,lmao its 65 dollars a year here,that is a little over 5 dollars a month,most of you spend more than that on a pack of cigarettes, a movie,or a few beers,yeah what a giant financial pyramid scheme.

[edit on 29-7-2007 by brotherforchrist]


Perhaps masonry is not the most lucrative "business," (if I may use the term broadly), but masonic lodges do have to worry about keeping financially solvent and paying their bills. They keep financially solvent by attracting new dues paying members and keeping existing members active and paying dues.



posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 09:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Masonic Light

Originally posted by Colloneh7
You guys gleefully high-fived yourselves right past my insertion of William Morgan twice.


Well, the whole Morgan thing has been done to death here over the past few years. There's only so much one can say about it, and all the posts can be found in the archives.

Personally, I think Morgan was a scoundrel. I also believe that he faked his death, just like he faked being a Mason. You can read about it here.


And the line about freemasonry not involved in politics is laughable. (see Secret Architecture of Washington, DC or Secret Mysteries of America's Beginnings - THE LINKS ARE ABOVE)


Well, I think your links are laughable, so I guess that's that.



I apologize for rehashing a topic that has been beaten to death, but would it not be more appropriate for masons just to acknowledge that a small handful of the many members of their organization did a bad thing? You would appear to be more reasonable if you acknowledged the sins of your fellow masons rather than tried to come up with lame excuses.



posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 09:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by hotpinkurinalmint
Perhaps masonry is not the most lucrative "business," (if I may use the term broadly), but masonic lodges do have to worry about keeping financially solvent and paying their bills. They keep financially solvent by attracting new dues paying members and keeping existing members active and paying dues.


If an organization cannot rely on its members to support its existence, who can it rely on?

(Not always the first to defend Freemasonry, but I find your logic somewhat flawed.)



posted on Jul, 31 2007 @ 07:06 AM
link   
To Colloneh7:

Did you know there were and are more christians involved in politics than freemasons? what do you make of that?

How would you know that the books youve read on conspiracy-theory have not misled you a bit? You would know by meeting the people you accuse, yourself, in person, live, in experience, for REAL. And then go meet the people who wrote those conspiracy-books for REAL. And then compare.

Do it. You will go "oooops. maybe I have been misled".



posted on Jul, 31 2007 @ 07:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Axeman

Whether he was or wasn't a Mason, whether he faked his death or not, and whether a handful of stupid overzealous Masons knocked him off or not, I really don't care. We're talking about the fraternity as an institution, not about the various misdeeds and shortcomings of individual Masons throughout history. Either way though, the Morgan affair is an isolated incident; hardly indicative of Masonry as a whole, or modern Masons, for that matter.


This is true, but there is so much misinformation from anti-Masons about the Morgan Affair, and they do not seem interested in looking at all of the facts.

Morgan was never a Mason. He conned his way into a Lodge, probably by blackmailing another Mason to vouch for him. But he soon began visiting all the Lodges locally, and became known in them as if he had been a Mason. He also began to live off of Masonic charity.

He received the Royal Arch degree along with several Master Masons. It was only when he signed a petition to form a new Royal Arch Chapter that he was discovered as an imposter. The Grand Royal Chapter of New York found out that the lodge he claimed he was originally initiated in didn't exist. Morgan then, of course, became unwelcome in the local Lodges, and hids livelihood, which was being leeched from the local Lodges, was cut off.

In retaliation, Morgan threatened to publish the rituals as were then in use by the Grand Lodge of New York unless they paid him money. The NY Masons refused to give into the blackmail. So he began to publish his book (which, in reality, was nothing more than a plagiarism of a French Masonic ritual expose').

So there's a couple of obvious points here. Morgan's book certainly revealed nothing new. Different versions of Masonic ritual have been in print since 1724, a century before Morgan. Therefore, it is unlikely that many Masons cared about Morgan's book, per se. What they were probably upset with is having been taken advantage of by this huckster. They had basically given the right hand of fellowship to a liar and a thief, as well as having even financially supported him and his family. And now he was trying to blackmail them. This obviously would have infuriated anybody.



posted on Jul, 31 2007 @ 08:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating
To Colloneh7:

Did you know there were and are more christians involved in politics than freemasons? what do you make of that?


Did you know that Christians don't meet in secrecy all of the time and that they don't swear a secret oath to each other upon threat of death?

Did you know that Christians don't perform occultic cermonies and don't worship an ominous G?

Did you know that Christians don't steer their brethren towards satanism? (not devil-worshipping)

Did you know that Christians are not even required to be a member of an organisation to be considered Christian?

Did you know that Christians don't have secret handshakes or occultic symbolism?

Did you know that Christians are not required to follow a pyramidal heirarchical structured system in which different levels of knowledge pertain to what degree you are at?

Did you know that being a Christian is something nobody can take away from you by cancelling your membership?

Did you know that secrecy is considered a bad thing to Christians?

Freemasonry is similar to religious organisations in that the members of said organisation can be duped by the leaders of said organisation and be persuaded to do things which are not beneficial to themselves or to others.

I have a problem with an organisation that is built around secrecy that applies not only to those outside of the organisation, but also to their own members.

I have a problem with politicians being involved in an organisation which can foster public policy being created in secrecy, not that that nescessarily describes freemasonry today.

I have a problem with an organisation that openly promotes RFID tracking for everyone, which goes against freedom and the Constitution of these here United States.

www.child-id.org...

www.google.com...

[edit on 31-7-2007 by Colloneh7]



posted on Jul, 31 2007 @ 09:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Colloneh7

Did you know that Christians....

[edit on 31-7-2007 by Colloneh7]



Well, the original reason for certain societies to go underground and secret was that they were persecuted and threatened for life by christians. Back then it was the inquisition that had a problem with them, today its the fundamentalist fire & brimstone bigots that spread hysteria and fear everywhere they go.

Your "knowledge" comes from books published by this special breed of christians. It does not come from having actually met freemasons or visiting lodges to see what they and the people are all about. You didnt respond to this in your last post, so I am assuming I am right.



posted on Jul, 31 2007 @ 11:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Colloneh7
Did you know that Christians don't meet in secrecy all of the time and that they don't swear a secret oath to each other upon threat of death?


So you can go sit in on a session with the Cardinals at the Vatican, right? You can just waltz in to a church and demand to be let in on their business meetings and sit in on their discussions about paying their bills, funding, projects, etc. right?


Did you know that Christians don't perform occultic cermonies and don't worship an ominous G?


Did you know that Christians symbolically eat flesh and drink blood, perform excorcisms, symbolically kill and raise from the dead (not just exhume the remains for decent interrment, but actually raising the dead, mind you)... your everyday usual stuff.

And let's not forget that at the end of the day, a crucifix is a likeness of a dead man on a cross.


Did you know that Christians don't steer their brethren towards satanism? (not devil-worshipping)


Did you know that Masonry does not "steer [the] brethren towards Satanism" either? I knew a hell of alot of people who grew up in the church, only to become some of the most rebellious and sinful people I knew. Seems like the preacher's son/daughter was always in the most trouble. Coincidence?


Did you know that Christians are not even required to be a member of an organisation to be considered Christian?


So they just baptize themselves and First Baptist is like "OK, we're cool with that."
yeah, right.


Did you know that Christians don't have secret handshakes or occultic symbolism?


Did you know what Christian symbolism is? You must not, to have made that statement. Handshakes? Maybe not. Who cares about handshakes, really. Are you jealous or something? What do you care about handshakes?


Did you know that Christians are not required to follow a pyramidal heirarchical structured system in which different levels of knowledge pertain to what degree you are at?


Really? So, Seminary college... does that count? Freshman, Sophomore, Junior, Senior, Graduate... sounds like some kind of a system based on levels of knowledge to me... Most preachers I know have a degree. It's called a PhD. I'm sure that degree is a direct result of their "level of knowledge."


Did you know that being a Christian is something nobody can take away from you by cancelling your membership?


Define Excommunication.


Did you know that secrecy is considered a bad thing to Christians?


Did you know that if that were true, we wouldn't see so many people driving around with that fish on their cars? That symbol was a result of Christian secrecy. I refer you to the scripture Masonic Light posted recently:


A talebearer revealeth secrets: but he that is of a faithful spirit concealeth the matter. (Proverbs 11:13)

A prudent man concealeth knowledge: but the heart of fools proclaimeth foolishness. (Proverbs 12:23)


Freemasonry is similar to religious organisations in that the members of said organisation can be duped by the leaders of said organisation and be persuaded to do things which are not beneficial to themselves or to others.


Freemasonry is similar to religious organizations in that the members of said organization are subject to ridicule and attack simply based on membership, and that ignorant people are easily duped into believing that there is something wrong with, or to fear from, said organization when in reality their knowledge on the subject is often less than nil.


I have a problem with an organisation that is built around secrecy that applies not only to those outside of the organisation, but also to their own members.


Well then, you don't like alot of things. Why pick on Masonry? See my earlier comment about the Vatican.


I have a problem with politicians being involved in an organisation which can foster public policy being created in secrecy, not that that nescessarily describes freemasonry today.


You have a problem with America? That's how it was born, buddy. You owe your freedom to men who fostered public policy in secret; and went to war to see that we, the future generations, would have it as good as we do. Many of these men were Masons.


I have a problem with an organisation that openly promotes RFID tracking for everyone, which goes against freedom and the Constitution of these here United States.


I have a problem with people who are either ignorant or too lazy to find out the facts related to their comments before spouting them off half-cocked. Better to just scan the titles of the google results, eh? Reading articles is hard work...


[edit on 7/31/07 by The Axeman]



posted on Jul, 31 2007 @ 01:04 PM
link   
You know, I didn't have much of a problem with freemasons until I came to this website, and met this wonderful crew of freemasons. The only real problem I did see is in the structure of the organisation. I know quite a bit more about freemasonry then you guys would like to admit.

I must ask why there are so many freemasons at this webite and why do they only post in this section (yes, I've looked at your individual posts and threads)? Let me answer this. It's called a contrarian troll.

The Contrarian Troll. A sophisticated breed, Contrarian Trolls frequent boards whose predominant opinions are contrary to their own. A forum dominated by those who support firearms and knife rights, for example, will invariably be visited by Contrarian Trolls espousing their beliefs in the benefits of gun control. It is important to distinguish between dissenters and actual Contrarian Trolls, however; the Contrarian is not categorized as a troll because of his or her dissenting opinions, but due to the manner in which he or she behaves:

– Contrarian Warning Sign Number One: The most important indicator of a poster's Contrarian Troll status is his constant use of subtle and not-so-subtle insults, a technique intended to make people angry. Contrarians will resist the urge to be insulting at first, but as their post count increases, they become more and more abusive of those with whom they disagree. Most often they initiate the insults in the course of what has been a civil, if heated, debate to that point.

– Contrarian Warning Sign Number Two: Constant references to the forum membership as monolithic. "You guys are all just [descriptor]." "You're a lynch mob." "You all just want to ridicule anyone who disagrees with you."

– Contrarian Warning Sign Number Three: Intellectual dishonesty. This is only a mild indicator that is not limited to trolls, but Contrarians display it to a high degree. They will lie about things they've said, pull posts out of context in a manner that changes their meanings significantly, and generally ignore any points for which they have no ready answers.

– Contrarian Warning Sign Number Four: Accusing the accusers. When confronted with their trolling, trolls immediately respond that it is the accusers who are trolls (see Natural Predators below). Often the Contrarian will single out his most vocal opponent and claim that while he can respect his other opponents, this one in particular is beneath his notice.

– Contrarian Warning Sign Number Five: Attempts to condescend. Pursued by Troll Bashers (see Natural Predators below), the Contrarian will seek refuge in condescending remarks that repeatedly scorn his or her critics as beneath notice – all the while continuing to respond to them.

– Contrarian Warning Sign Number Six: One distinctive mark of Contrarian Trolls is that every thread in which they dissent quickly devolves into a debate about who is trolling whom. In the course of such a debate the Contrarian will display many of the other Warning Signs mentioned above.




If I were an admin here........



posted on Jul, 31 2007 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Colloneh7

. It's called a contrarian troll.


If I were an admin here........



Youve got it all figured out, havent you? Congratulations.

If you were the administrator here you would...what?



posted on Jul, 31 2007 @ 02:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Colloneh7
You know, I didn't have much of a problem with freemasons until I came to this website, and met this wonderful crew of freemasons. The only real problem I did see is in the structure of the organization. I know quite a bit more about freemasonry then you guys would like to admit.


And how it shows!



I must ask why there are so many freemasons at this website and why do they only post in this section (yes, I've looked at your individual posts and threads)? Let me answer this. It's called a contrarian troll.


Now we're "Contrarian Trolls" on top of being power hungry Satanists bent on global domination, mind-control, pedophilia, baby-eating, exploding toilets, and always leaving the seat up in the ladies' restroom...


Let me clue you in to a little something here. I have no interest in debating or discussing UFO's or many of the other topics presented on this website here. I may be interested in them, but not to the point of posting/debating the topic with anyone. I am here to discuss/debate the topic of Freemasonry. It just so happens that this is one of the most entertaining and informative places to do so. That's why I post here and nowhere else. This (Masonry) is what's important to me; not hearing people rag on Bush, or speculate about UFO sightings, or encounters with ghosts, or any of the other "alternative topics." If you don't like my choice of venue, that's not my problem. I don't remember asking if it was OK with you if I only post here.

You plagiarize some other website (no source - check the T&C's - unless, of course, you wrote that yourself...) rather than offer discussion about YOUR OWN IDEAS on the topic (not something parroted from someone else). If you're insulted by what I said, then you need some thicker skin, my friend. Every post labeling Masons pedophiles, or molesters, or Satanists, or liars, or stating that we're all stupid enough to be "duped" by some unseen malevolent string-puller into doing his bidding, or that we as members can't possibly know more about our own fraternity than some crackpot conspiracy theorist, is an insult to Masons everywhere. In my opinion, and I'm sure there are others (even non-Masons, incidentally) that would agree that we do quite well with our tempers, given the severity of the accusations that are constantly leveled against us here. Some are more sucessful at this than others, of course, but try being on the receiving end of that sometime, see if you don't occasionally get cranky with someone.

The difference between us and those described in the "Contrarian Troll" (I'd love to meet the guy that came up with that) article you so painstakingly copied and pasted, is that we deal in facts, and we back up what we say with reputable sources. If I give an opinion, I will state it as such. If you disagree, fine. I'm not going to attack someone for disagreeing with me. We can agree to disagree. It is when people imply or express their belief that I am some kind of half-wit moron who has no idea what I've gotten into - but they, however, with their mastery of internet research, know the truth about it - that I tend to get cantankerous. I'll speak my mind and I'll take my warnings when earned, I have no problem with that.

What I do have a problem with is people besmirching the name of what I know to be a harmless, and indeed very beneficial, fraternity because someone told them or they read on the internet that Masons [insert wild accusation here], all the while ignoring the responses of good honest Masons when queried on the subject. We are labeled as liars and heretics and just about everything under the sun... and for what? So that paranoid individuals who cannot take their share of the collective responsibility for the state of the world can have someone tangible at whom they can point their crooked little fingers?

If the best you can do is stick your tongue out and say "nyah-nyah" and call us "Contrarian Trolls," then you should probably read up and come back when you can actually debate the topic and provide information and resources to back up your claims.

Until then... *starts to hold breath, but thinks better of it*

[edit on 7/31/07 by The Axeman]



posted on Jul, 31 2007 @ 02:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by hotpinkurinalmint
I apologize for rehashing a topic that has been beaten to death, but would it not be more appropriate for masons just to acknowledge that a small handful of the many members of their organization did a bad thing? You would appear to be more reasonable if you acknowledged the sins of your fellow masons rather than tried to come up with lame excuses.


We do though. There have been Masons who have done bad things, and there are certainly less-than-worthy men who are current members of the fraternity.

I make no excuses for anyone; I do, however, maintain that the actions of a few do not represent the whole of the organization. People tend to latch onto several common incidents in every anti-Masonic argument you will see. Go back through the archives and you will see we have all been talking about the same few things for years now.

No one is perfect, and if one of our own is guilty of serious wrongdoing, he will be summarily expelled from the fraternity. What more can people ask of us?



posted on Jul, 31 2007 @ 02:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Colloneh7
You know, I didn't have much of a problem with freemasons until I came to this website, and met this wonderful crew of freemasons. The only real problem I did see is in the structure of the organisation. I know quite a bit more about freemasonry then you guys would like to admit.


Really? I haven't seen you demonstrate any knowledge of Freemasonry, but only whine that it isn't Christianity (which it isn't supposed to be). And even then, when Axe answered you point by point, you just ignored it.

Now, if you really "know quite a bit more about Freemasonry" than you're being credited for, let's hear it, we're all ears.



posted on Jul, 31 2007 @ 03:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Colloneh7
"You know, I didn't have much of a problem with freemasons until I came to this website, and met this wonderful crew of freemasons. The only real problem I did see is in the structure of the organisation. I know quite a bit more about freemasonry then you guys would like to admit."

I must ask why there are so many freemasons at this webite and why do they only post in this section (yes, I've looked at your individual posts and threads)? Let me answer this. It's called a contrarian troll.

"The Contrarian Troll. A sophisticated breed, Contrarian Trolls frequent boards whose predominant opinions are contrary to their own. A forum dominated by those who support firearms and knife rights, for example, will invariably be visited by Contrarian Trolls espousing their beliefs in the benefits of gun control. It is important to distinguish between dissenters and actual Contrarian Trolls, however; the Contrarian is not categorized as a troll because of his or her dissenting opinions, but due to the manner in which he or she behaves:

– Contrarian Warning Sign Number One: The most important indicator of a poster's Contrarian Troll status is his constant use of subtle and not-so-subtle insults, a technique intended to make people angry. Contrarians will resist the urge to be insulting at first, but as their post count increases, they become more and more abusive of those with whom they disagree. Most often they initiate the insults in the course of what has been a civil, if heated, debate to that point.

– Contrarian Warning Sign Number Two: Constant references to the forum membership as monolithic. "You guys are all just [descriptor]." "You're a lynch mob." "You all just want to ridicule anyone who disagrees with you."

– Contrarian Warning Sign Number Three: Intellectual dishonesty. This is only a mild indicator that is not limited to trolls, but Contrarians display it to a high degree. They will lie about things they've said, pull posts out of context in a manner that changes their meanings significantly, and generally ignore any points for which they have no ready answers.

– Contrarian Warning Sign Number Four: Accusing the accusers. When confronted with their trolling, trolls immediately respond that it is the accusers who are trolls (see Natural Predators below). Often the Contrarian will single out his most vocal opponent and claim that while he can respect his other opponents, this one in particular is beneath his notice.

– Contrarian Warning Sign Number Five: Attempts to condescend. Pursued by Troll Bashers (see Natural Predators below), the Contrarian will seek refuge in condescending remarks that repeatedly scorn his or her critics as beneath notice – all the while continuing to respond to them.

– Contrarian Warning Sign Number Six: One distinctive mark of Contrarian Trolls is that every thread in which they dissent quickly devolves into a debate about who is trolling whom. In the course of such a debate the Contrarian will display many of the other Warning Signs mentioned above.




If I were an admin here........



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join