Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Problems? Is your data what you think it is?

Re: Maximum down-votes per monk/day

by Anonymous Monk
on May 14, 2013 at 16:56 UTC ( #1033525=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to Maximum down-votes per monk/day

So how many per day, or which percentage of my votes can I dedicate to his propaganda?

Prop-a-gand-a: ... uses loaded messages to produce an emotional rather than rational response to the information presented.

Your use of the word propaganda in this context is itself progranda. You are using the negative connutations of that word to induce an emotional response to cause the reader to see your opinion, and your actions in support of your opinion as virtuous.

They may be, but it would be better to avoid using propaganda to counter what you see as propaganda, and stick to rational justifications.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Maximum down-votes per monk/day
by Anonymous Monk on May 19, 2013 at 00:46 UTC

    Hi! Anonymous Monk here again.

    To those of you who've upvoted the above comment, thank you! I assume you did so because you understood it to be telling someone to be nice. (And shouldn't we all be nice?)

    Unfortunately for me, Anonymous Monk, I now realize that my earlier statements have major flaws. In fact, there are so many obvious flaws that I feel like I must have been a different person when I wrote the comment above.

    • My definition of propaganda is not correct. Oops, I guess I should have looked it up before correcting someone based on its meaning.
    • This purported definition is pedantry. Pedantry is a bullying form of rhetoric, a cheap form of argument from authority, if you will. What was I thinking? As we see from my first point, it wasn't to establish fact.
    • My argument that calling something propaganda is itself propaganda is specious. Worse, my phrase "in this context" is disingenuous, since any context in which the word "propaganda" is not freighted with negative connotations would be non-operative, e.g., as in a discussion of the etymology of the word.
    • Even worse I hide my warped reasoning behind a barrage of pseudo-intellectual phrases (which would have come across better if only I had used spell check!) to reach a conclusion that the OP is actively running a campaign of counter-propaganda. At the end of my second paragraph I have imputed that the OP is himself a propagandist. That is where you upvoters probably got the idea that the OP was not being nice. However, I went back to the original post and could not find out how the question of wanting downvoting to be counted was a form of counter-propaganda. In my enthusiasm for smacking down anyone who uses the word propaganda I overreached and started rebuking non-existent actions. Gosh, if it weren't for the fact I am a faceless entity, I might have to be worried about being charged with libel!

    Anyway, dear upvoters, I'm sure that by my last sentence, where I, in my role of goody-goody objective authority, call upon the OP to use rationality as the basis of discourse, you were sure and certain that I had made a stand for civility against the evil forces of strong opinion and should be endorsed accordingly. Again, I thank you.

    But now I address those who didn't upvote me. I ask that you forgive me, Anonymous Monk, for crafting such a mistaken, sanctimonious, supercilious and illogical chastisement that must seem to have been crafted by a pretentious lackwit truckling to the politically correct "don't use words that can possibly offend anyone" crowd. I promise you that in the future, I, Anonymous Monk will do better.

    ... and, alas, worse.

    (Maybe I should increase my lithium dosage?)

      sarcasm++ :)

      thanks, very entertaining! xD

      Cheers Rolf

      ( addicted to the Perl Programming Language)

      -- To those of you who've upvoted the above comment, thank you! I assume you did so because you understood it to be telling someone to be nice. (And shouldn't we all be nice?)

      O'fanku 4 showin' uz d'errs ov uz ways. Innit.
      It wer st'pid ov uz 2 fink dat wez cud dezid 4 uzzelves 'ow wez can blow uz bling votes.
      P'aps u can uz yor god-gi'n spidy skills 2 make only the rite bu'on 'sply so wez paw deluznol b4k4s dont do it some more.
      Wez marvell a'youz skillz 2 sus d'trrof. Props innit man.

Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://1033525]
and all is quiet...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others drinking their drinks and smoking their pipes about the Monastery: (6)
As of 2018-04-25 19:19 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?