Just more evidence to these people that they're right.

Some might be former posters but not banned.

#7 | POSTED BY EBERLY

So why make a new user name?

There are numerous very obvious left wingnut sock puppets appearing all the time on the Retort.

Such as?

And boaz check which email you sent my invitation to. I never got it LOL

To be honest JPW, I wish I could extend an invitation to more DR liberals.

It was a joke, boaz. Y'all went off and started that for a reason, reasons I largely disagreed with.

But yes, in any case some would make it too personal I'm sure.

I know for a fact that a few of them shared at least one user name.

A Discord user and I have occasional email contact and I was informed.

More to the point...you haven't noticed "newbies" coming in and posting like veterans? Folks who, on their first or second day, are dominating threads with the same talking points (and phraseology) as The (self-)Banned Bunch?

And when called out for having knowledge of DR events that occurred years ago or posters who have been gone for years will throw out the lame "I'm a long time lurker" excuse.

Why would RCADE need to stop anybody? You think they were banned?

#35 | POSTED BY EBERLY

If they had to make a new user name then that's a solid assumption.

Celebrate that if you like.

#52 | POSTED BY MIRANDA7

Have you tried engaging in a manner that isn't a presumptuous tut tutting like a mother?

I love it how people whine so much about how they're treated here.

Don't like it? Try not posting easily or already debunked crap over and over and over and over and over...

You don't earn respect when you show up here and argue in bad faith.

Economics is great at post-mortem reports.

Taking the recent past and explaining it in constructs they create.

As far as doing well predicting future events or reliably assessing markets/trends ect? Pfffft. Sucks. Sucks bad.

And the way things are so extensively integrated now basics like supply and demand often fail to predict or explain phenomena.

I'm not sure why.

Because despite the above it's treated as a hard discipline where over-confidence is rampant.

But he lectures others on "you get what you give"

This is only a relevant comment if he whines about how he is treated.

He doesn't seem to. He seems to accept his role as ---- talker and ---- taker.

It was this...."I treat most people on the DR with respect."

Honestly, I don't pay attention to him unless he's directly addressing me.

Is he really a dick to everybody? Or are you just following your confirmation bias and thinking only of those he is a dick to?

Another garbage post. "debunked"? Is that what you call the Biden's memoirs these days.

#109 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

That was specific for the people it was addressed to.

For morons like you the crap you spew is so bad it never even got far enough off the ground to need debunking.

a few other rabid cornholers around here don't like a bit of a challenge in you hidey-hole here, doesn't mean everyone you don't know/agree with is a sock puppet.

We don't despise you because you're a "challenge."

We despise you because you're a dishonest, lying sack of ----.

See the difference?

People like Clownshack and Yav and Danforth, and JPW make me ashamed to say I'm a liberal.

I've lurked here a bit more than I've posted and I must say, this site is void of any real substance.

You're blind if you think that's not the remaining conservative's fault.

They voted for four more years of Trump but less than a hundred days of Biden and the country is dead. Ask why? You get nonsense from Breitbart or worse. Usually worse.

Look at the recent discussion with --------------- pushing Ashley Biden's "journal" claiming showers with Dad made her a sex addict.

It's pure garbage not worthy of a legit response and acting like it is for the sake of "substance" is validating it.

Sorry, but if that's your thing then I'm glad you dont want to be like me because you've got some serious issues with integrity and honesty.

And you're a perpetual idiot that continues to post garbage replies, fake virologist. You got your stupid --- called out a little while back. More like a janitor at the CDC.

#144 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

You calling making up stupid stuff isnt "calling someone out."

It's you making stupid stuff up because you don't have a thing to say worth posting.

#162 that you're a whiner?

Or do you really think a well reasoned, thought out response is required to baseless assertions from right wing lunacy sites that Biden showered with his daughter?

Some stuff is beneath a civil response, especially when it's repeated over and over by the same poster after it's been pointed out as baseless tabloid level nonsense.

BTW I'm not a liberal, either.

Maybe be more familiar with posters before complaining about their conduct?

That's always creepy when you pull out that line, and you do it too often for it not to be significant in your life.

#145 | POSTED BY YAV

Yeup.

You're whining there isn't substantive conversation but yet don't address the questions.

Is that type of posting worthy of a response?

How about random assertions of molestation out of the blue? Is that substantive enough for you?

If you're honest, don't lie, and are actually interested in conversing this place is fine.

There are certainly lefty posters who will go after any viewpoint that differs from theirs. Usually accusing the poster of being a Conservative even when they're not. I know because it's happened to me.

But there are plenty of posters here who will engage in good faith debate and discussion when posts are made in good faith to begin with.

Liberals are much more civil and less insulting to others than you.

#170 | POSTED BY JAKESTER

Yawn.

Accepting tabloid lies and garbage isn't being civil.

It's convincing yourself you're being civil while really you're just being walked on.

And again, I've attempted to engage you in good faith by asking real questions.

You've avoided them and made your own personal attacks instead.

Seems a bit hypocritical, no?

Can you cite two of them?

#176 | Posted by jakester

Well, there was the initial comment and the prove my point follow ups that were made in lieu of answering straight forward questions.

You called a poster childish and petulant.

Your unwillingness to address direct questions makes me question how concerned you actually are with other poster's conduct.

JPW says, "you're just being walked on."

By whom?

#175 | Posted by jakester

The person lying to your face and slandering other people while receiving no push back from you.

I will NOT accept or promote a false premise by a trumper so that it can be "argued." You don't argue about the value of a lie.

Much better put than my posts.

Although I would say a false premise by anybody.

And Danforth? You complained about Danforth?
{sigh}

#177 | Posted by YAV

Yeah that one didn't make much sense to me either.

Again, I ask if you can cite two instances?

#184 | Posted by jakester

LOL this guy is a goatman clone.

Already did. Your semantics don't change that.

Answer my questions that I asked several times above.

Or just tell me you'll answer them after I answer your already answered question and truly be a goatman clone.

This dude has got to be goatman.

or else he has the goatuse skills down pat.

Answer the questions, jakester.

Should tabloid lies and slander be treated as civil conversation and responded to with a reasoned, substantive argument? What about the third time it's posted after twice being shown to be unsubstantiated BS? Still have to be "civil" and respond politely?

I'm doing what you claimed you wanted and am trying to engage you in good faith without insult, mockery or names calling.

You do want that, don't you?

but I like seeing it done with logic and facts, not with kindergarten name calling. That really doesn't do it for me.

So you're a pseudointellectual then?

Can't think of any other reason to keep blathering on about civil conversation while continually dodging attempts to have a discussion so you can keep whining about the quality of discussions.

Do you watch those liberal YouTube channels with RANDOM words CAPITALIZED in the titles so you know some Fox host got HUMILIATED or DESTROYED? Only to have a short video clip followed by a guy in a suit giving easy analysis and saying nothing that a well informed person wouldn't already know?

Is that what you want when you look liberals to BASH conservatives with FACTS and LOGIC?

Do so in a civil manner and you are less likely to hear them repeated than if you engage in name calling. That has been my experience.

#194 | Posted by jakester

Thank you for answering.

I can tell you that that doesn't work with certain posters. A civil rebuttal will be met with crude arguments, often repeating the original claim, and logical fallacies galore.

The next time the topic comes up the same lie will be repeated again as if the previous rebuttal never happened.

Wash, rinse, repeat.

Those posters are the ones you see met with derision and contempt. They're known variables to veteran posters here and, often times because of what I described above, the topics have already been beaten to death.

The treatment you find off putting isn't arbitrary or unearned.

As an example check out this thread if you haven't already:

Why lower yourself to that level?

#198 | Posted by jakester

A good question I don't have a good answer for.

I could, of course, plonk them but that just seems like a cop out.

And by plenty.....you mean?

#200 | Posted by eberly

Just about every poster here is capable at times.

See the particle physics thread currently up.

You
Yav
Corky (on most topics)
Madscientist
Danforth
AmericanUnity
Tor
Boaz (at times)
et_al
Tao
Redial
Madbomber (on most topics)
Rsty

Who would you say never engages in good faith debate?

Plonk means to block their posts, I presume?

Yes, the kill file option available on poster's user pages.

But if you feel that is a cop out, just ignore them. That would appear to be a win/win situation.

#202 | Posted by jakester

Oh I know. The rational side of my brain says that for sure.

But the irrational side loathes dishonesty and has trouble letting it slide.

The frustrating part is say, when a poster gets corrected with irrefutable facts and figures, then pops up later to regurgitate the same lies.

#218 | Posted by Danforth

And these are the posters who get the most derision thrown their way.

Outside of a few lefty trolls who will go after anybody who disagrees with them you're not going to be called names or found yourself targeted by 90% of the posters here UNLESS you do what is described above.

And again, why is it so important to you to make someone think like yourself?

This is a gross misrepresentation of the problem.

We're not talking about subjective disagreements like whether you prefer bolognese or marinara.

We're talking about assertions like the election was stolen. Or Biden abused his daughter by showering with her at an inappropriate age.

Statements that are not only patently false but repugnant.

IOW other posters will have to agree with you or get hounded.. Got it thanks

#240 | Posted by phesterOBoyle

See 241.

And see, jakester? The liars very frequently use the "you just want everybody to think like you" or "you can't stand people who disagree with you" joke all the time.

You know that. I know that. But here are people who believe otherwise. You cannot change a Trumper's mind. That is the truth. And you say you want people to believe the truth. Believe that one. If you can't accept that truism, , how can you expect others to accept your truths?

#226 | Posted by jakester

Two questions.

If your this cynical, then why are you here?

If there is no point as you seem to believe, then why are you complaining about poster's conduct here?

i>So, you must believe Clownshack is a lefty troll.

#244 | Posted by eberly

Quite frequently, yes he is.

Along with rein and OWS and a few others.

And yes, I do include myself on that list. There are only a few repugnant posters that I go after aggressively. Bellring, family and fortfisher mostly.

Occasionally boaz when he's spouting some nonsense that he comes back with time after time after time despite being shown how wrong it is.

Me? I have better things to do with my life than futilely shoving memes in a conservative's facce and repeating talking points.

#230 | Posted by jakester

Then why are you here?

Deflection weak and ineffective. Everyone knows the truth.

#245 | Posted by phesterOBoyle

"Everyone knows..." LOL

Sorry, phester, it's not a simple disagreement most of the time.

It's Trumpers spreading blatantly false, often disgusting nonsense.

US says nearly 19,000 kids picked up traveling alone across Mexican border in March, largest monthly number ever tallied.

#255 | POSTED BY PHESTEROBOYLE

Has that article ever been a point of conetention?

If not then it's just a non sequitur and only goes to illustrate the dishonest nature most righties around here "debate" with.

Same chyt different day. IE if yuo don't like it GFO I'm functionally illiterate so I'm going to make stuff up instead of addressing the real point.

#280 | POSTED BY PHESTEROBOYLE

FTFY

Yeah...the last ting you would want is to acknowledge that Nazi was short German for "National Socialism."

Why would you insist that a shallow, ignorant historical point be respected?

BTW that doesn't mean they were socialists.

Are you going to next claim that the Soviet Socialists weren't socialists either?
If so, where does it end?

#293 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

Yawn.

The soviets didn't act like socialists either. Well, not the top at least.

True communism hasn't really been implemented because human nature means opportunists and ruthlessly selfish people will place themselves at the top to everybody else's detriment.

Also, don't be so stupid as to act as if calling yourself something while behaving entirely differently means you're still what the name says. You're smarter than that...I think?

this is where having attended an econ course or two would have been of benefit to you. Or history.

Because I was an honors scholarship student, my undergrad university let me take a 400 level history class that focused on 1936-1945 because I have a particular interest in that period.

I know plenty about those years.

Which is why I know your bluffing when you come at us with the "but their name says socialist" nonsense.