Memes and stuff

The Off-Topic forum for anything non-LDS related. No insults or personal attacks allowed. Rated G.
Binger
God
Posts: 6133
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2021 12:34 am
Location: That's the difference. I actually have a Blue Heeler

Re: Biden's Economy?

Post by Binger »

Res Ipsa wrote:
Thu Jan 27, 2022 9:07 pm
Binger wrote:
Thu Jan 27, 2022 8:46 pm


Yep. Gimme a bit. Want it in paradise? Would there be any reason to take it up a notch to [super duper] or to let it fly unchained in prison?
Let's try SSP as an experiment. If it feels too restrictive, we can adjust.
I like it.
Binger
God
Posts: 6133
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2021 12:34 am
Location: That's the difference. I actually have a Blue Heeler

Re: Memes & Stuff

Post by Binger »

You have got to be [edited for the SSP] kidding me.
Last edited by Binger on Fri Jan 28, 2022 1:35 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Res Ipsa
God
Posts: 9568
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2020 6:44 pm
Location: Playing Rabbits

Re: Biden's Economy?

Post by Res Ipsa »

Binger wrote:
Thu Jan 27, 2022 8:26 pm
Res Ipsa wrote:
Thu Jan 27, 2022 6:11 pm


I get my entertainment mostly from fiction podcasts. I get the game. No matter what substantive comment makes about your meme, you will respond in whatever way you think portrays you as a being with superior insight. It's easy with memes. Much harder when one simply states one's opinions or views.
That is not it. Let's continue this discussion. What other reasons could there be in posting a meme, rather than engaging in dialogues with words, thoughts and ideas? For example, could a meme be used to portray a person as having the same ideas and insights? What if I wanted to be your buddy, and your buddy's buddy, and your buddy's buddy's buddy and your buddies' buddy? If that was my ambition, could I use a meme to make me look cool, like you, your buddies, and your buddies' buddies? What about a meme that would make me look submissive to them so they would like me? What about a meme that would make me look like I was the alpha asshole and was smashing the people that you and your buddies want smashed?
Exactly. The meme is ambiguous, which means the person who posts it can declare what means after someone reacts. That’s the beauty of posting ambiguous things.

When I asked for clarification, you said this:
"This" is information from Biden that would contradict a suggestion made in a previous post or generate a different response.
The “or” continues the ambiguity.

Now, I’ll admit that I can’t tell what you intended when you posted the meme. Just because the ambiguity would allow you to choose an interpretation after I responded doesn’t mean that you actually intended to do that. But, but from my side of the conversation, nothing tells me whether you had an internet at the time you posted or whether how I react to the meme will determine how you will interpret the meme.

So, at the time you posted the meme, what, if anything, did you intend to communicate to readers of the thread. And if you think I’m asking the wrong question, please tell me the question you think I should be asking.

by the way, the digs in this new forum are pretty fancy. The grand piano is a nice touch. Pity about the name.
he/him
When I go to sea, don’t fear for me. Fear for the storm.

Jessica Best, Fear for the Storm. From The Strange Case of the Starship Iris.
Binger
God
Posts: 6133
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2021 12:34 am
Location: That's the difference. I actually have a Blue Heeler

Re: Memes & Stuff (Under Construction

Post by Binger »

Res Ipsa wrote:
Fri Jan 28, 2022 6:21 am
Binger wrote:
Fri Jan 28, 2022 4:30 am
You have got to be damned kidding me.
Never. I wanted to leave the meme in the original thread, so I copied and pasted it into a new OP here. But I forgot that when I moved the rest of the posts, the software would sort them by date. D’oh

Hah! Fixed. I’ve put Joe in his place.
Gotchya, I cleaned up the subject in my post that you brought over. Makes sense now. Thanks man.
Binger
God
Posts: 6133
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2021 12:34 am
Location: That's the difference. I actually have a Blue Heeler

Re: Biden's Economy?

Post by Binger »

Res Ipsa wrote:
Fri Jan 28, 2022 6:47 am
Binger wrote:
Thu Jan 27, 2022 8:26 pm


That is not it. Let's continue this discussion. What other reasons could there be in posting a meme, rather than engaging in dialogues with words, thoughts and ideas? For example, could a meme be used to portray a person as having the same ideas and insights? What if I wanted to be your buddy, and your buddy's buddy, and your buddy's buddy's buddy and your buddies' buddy? If that was my ambition, could I use a meme to make me look cool, like you, your buddies, and your buddies' buddies? What about a meme that would make me look submissive to them so they would like me? What about a meme that would make me look like I was the alpha asshole and was smashing the people that you and your buddies want smashed?
Exactly. The meme is ambiguous, which means the person who posts it can declare what means after someone reacts. That’s the beauty of posting ambiguous things.

When I asked for clarification, you said this:
"This" is information from Biden that would contradict a suggestion made in a previous post or generate a different response.
The “or” continues the ambiguity.

Now, I’ll admit that I can’t tell what you intended when you posted the meme. Just because the ambiguity would allow you to choose an interpretation after I responded doesn’t mean that you actually intended to do that. But, but from my side of the conversation, nothing tells me whether you had an internet at the time you posted or whether how I react to the meme will determine how you will interpret the meme.

So, at the time you posted the meme, what, if anything, did you intend to communicate to readers of the thread[?] And if you think I’m asking the wrong question, please tell me the question you think I should be asking.

by the way, the digs in this new forum are pretty fancy. The grand piano is a nice touch. Pity about the name.
If'n you don't mind. I may tackle this in parts. But, let me start with some serious and sincere snark as an example of what I am thinking.

Check this out.
Res Ipsa wrote:
Fri Jan 28, 2022 6:47 am
But, but from my side of the conversation, nothing tells me whether you had an internet [sic] at the time you posted or whether how I react to the meme will determine how you will interpret the meme.
Your post is set up, intentionally or not, for me to play with and comment on. I could do something passively aggressive, like add an emphasis and highlight your typo/autocorrect with a [sic], or I could just add a [sic] as a courtesy, or I could just be civil and honor the intent of your post which I believe was to have some connection or dialogue about a topic that interests you, or I could get literal and lambast over the absurdity of you not being told whether I had an internet, or I could just call you stupid or obtuse for pointing out something so blatantly obvious, or I could just go bananas and question whether ever I owed you any information about whether I had an internet [sic] or an [intent].

The point I am making is that I will choose how to interpret your post. I choose what to do with the previous post. I will choose whether to be aggressive (you ***** ****** ***** useless ***** ***** **** can't even spellcheck your own posts) or civil, or accommodating. I will choose whether to provoke a reaction, or seek some kind of connection or understanding, or to continue the dialogue. I could even choose to have some clarification before I do anything. I will make my move, and you will make yours. Your move will include your reaction or interpretation of what I do.

My move or choice will also be determined by my experience with you, with the topic, with the group, with the forum, with the other moderators and whatever else is going on in my life or my experience here. (The conditions topic is one we have hashed out in the past.)

Next up.... the answer.
Binger
God
Posts: 6133
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2021 12:34 am
Location: That's the difference. I actually have a Blue Heeler

Re: Biden's Economy?

Post by Binger »

Original Post with Res Ipsa's comment and Binger's picture:
Binger wrote:
Thu Jan 27, 2022 3:05 pm
Res Ipsa wrote:
Tue Jan 18, 2022 5:43 am

Gunnar, I don't think the federal government can do anything Constitutionally about that particular issue. I think the Constitution specifically gives state legislators the power to decide how a state's electors are appointed in a Presidential election. I think a state legislature could pass a law saying that the electors are chosen by the state legislature and skip voting by the citizens entirely. That's a situation that the citizens of those states will have to address with their state legislatures.

In fact, the bill that the Republicans want to pass will make sure that the federal government can do nothing by clarifying that the VP does not have the power to do what the coup plotters wanted him to do: reject the certified electors of a state. While I agree that the VP does not constitutionally have the power to refuse to accept the certified electors, I don't think the congressional republicans care much about the what the constitution requires -- they want this legislation in place so that Harris can't do what the coup plotters wanted to do if any state legislatures choose to override the choice of the people in their state. It's purely tactical. If we had a republican President and VP, they wouldn't vote for any reform.

What federal legislation could do is prohibit voter suppression. But the Rs don't want that, because their suppression legislation is aimed at the folks who tend to vote for Dems. So, it's either break the filibuster or suppression is the order of the day in states controlled by Rs.
Well, there is also this.

Image
Res Ipsa's question in this thread
Res Ipsa wrote:
Fri Jan 28, 2022 6:47 am
So, at the time you posted the meme, what, if anything, did you intend to communicate to readers of the thread[?]

And if you think I’m asking the wrong question, please tell me the question you think I should be asking.
This too is coming in parts.... It is early, you have to suffer, even in Spirit Paradise Paradise, with my disorganization.

I had a few intentions, and unlike many other memes, I recall them very specifically.
  • Show that there is contradictory information to the claim you were making
  • Show that the source of that contradictory information could be the people that are motivated to do what you are advocating
  • Inject a fist of snark into a conversation that I know, very well, I am not welcome to join authentically (conditions again, right or wrong)
  • Get a reaction, particularly from you for making what I thought, was an over the top generalization about a topic and about a group of people
  • Stay on topic and stay out of moderator court
  • Do all the above with the LEAST amount of effort because effort is wasted. (If Atlanticmike or his puppets are reading this, it is waisted. And that is funny :lol: )
You are not asking the wrong question. The better question..... for this and other topics is....... "What reaction did you expect?"
Marcus
God
Posts: 5033
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 10:44 pm

Re: Biden's Economy?

Post by Marcus »

Binger wrote:
Fri Jan 28, 2022 2:44 pm

I had a few intentions, and unlike many other memes, I recall them very specifically.
...
  • Inject a fist of snark into a conversation that I know, very well, I am not welcome to join authentically (conditions again, right or wrong)
....
That right there explains the most.
User avatar
Res Ipsa
God
Posts: 9568
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2020 6:44 pm
Location: Playing Rabbits

Re: Biden's Economy?

Post by Res Ipsa »

Binger wrote:
Fri Jan 28, 2022 2:19 pm
Res Ipsa wrote:
Fri Jan 28, 2022 6:47 am


Exactly. The meme is ambiguous, which means the person who posts it can declare what means after someone reacts. That’s the beauty of posting ambiguous things.

When I asked for clarification, you said this:



The “or” continues the ambiguity.

Now, I’ll admit that I can’t tell what you intended when you posted the meme. Just because the ambiguity would allow you to choose an interpretation after I responded doesn’t mean that you actually intended to do that. But, but from my side of the conversation, nothing tells me whether you had an internet at the time you posted or whether how I react to the meme will determine how you will interpret the meme.

So, at the time you posted the meme, what, if anything, did you intend to communicate to readers of the thread[?] And if you think I’m asking the wrong question, please tell me the question you think I should be asking.

by the way, the digs in this new forum are pretty fancy. The grand piano is a nice touch. Pity about the name.
If'n you don't mind. I may tackle this in parts. But, let me start with some serious and sincere snark as an example of what I am thinking.

Check this out.
Res Ipsa wrote:
Fri Jan 28, 2022 6:47 am
But, but from my side of the conversation, nothing tells me whether you had an internet [sic] at the time you posted or whether how I react to the meme will determine how you will interpret the meme.
Your post is set up, intentionally or not, for me to play with and comment on. I could do something passively aggressive, like add an emphasis and highlight your typo/autocorrect with a [sic], or I could just add a [sic] as a courtesy, or I could just be civil and honor the intent of your post which I believe was to have some connection or dialogue about a topic that interests you, or I could get literal and lambast over the absurdity of you not being told whether I had an internet, or I could just call you stupid or obtuse for pointing out something so blatantly obvious, or I could just go bananas and question whether ever I owed you any information about whether I had an internet [sic] or an [intent].

The point I am making is that I will choose how to interpret your post. I choose what to do with the previous post. I will choose whether to be aggressive (you ***** ****** ***** useless ***** ***** **** can't even spellcheck your own posts) or civil, or accommodating. I will choose whether to provoke a reaction, or seek some kind of connection or understanding, or to continue the dialogue. I could even choose to have some clarification before I do anything. I will make my move, and you will make yours. Your move will include your reaction or interpretation of what I do.

My move or choice will also be determined by my experience with you, with the topic, with the group, with the forum, with the other moderators and whatever else is going on in my life or my experience here. (The conditions topic is one we have hashed out in the past.)

Next up.... the answer.
All this sounds reasonable to me, but with an asterisk that I’ll address once I’ve read your next posts.
he/him
When I go to sea, don’t fear for me. Fear for the storm.

Jessica Best, Fear for the Storm. From The Strange Case of the Starship Iris.
Binger
God
Posts: 6133
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2021 12:34 am
Location: That's the difference. I actually have a Blue Heeler

Re: Biden's Economy?

Post by Binger »

Res Ipsa wrote:
Fri Jan 28, 2022 6:47 am
So, at the time you posted the meme, what, if anything, did you intend to communicate to readers of the thread[?]
Part 2 or 3, but who is counting?

Like other posts in any forum, what one intends to communicate is a part of a post. Another part of the post is the intent to participate. Another part may be the intent to create participation or reactions from others. If you look at what I listed in the above post, some items were related to the content of the communication, though they were at best tangential and ambiguous. This is something you pointed out, Res. Ambiguity or being tangentially on-topic may even be something that frustrates you or another forum participant.

Treading lightly and vulnerably here...... the point where the reaction we generate is the primary motivation of our participation (in whole or in part) is where we may enter passive aggression territory with communication, in my opinion.

Let's use something else I did as an example, since we have already gone into vulnerable spaces. I took the literal suggestion of the moderators and another poster to start new threads rather than go off topic. I started threads with "From: " in the subject. Hilarious. The opening was there, and I was going to shoot the gap, so I did. Was the intent to communicate something that I thought was important and worth extracting from a thread? Heck no. The intent was to lampoon the conversation, mock the process, highlight the limitations or conditions, and trigger the moderators. The intent was to GET A REACTION! I doubled down, and even reached out to the moderators and Dr. Shades (who brilliantly saw through it all and called out the entirety of the process with an invitation, which I am violating a rule by vulnerably sharing here.) Now, I did not intend to get banned (that was a reaction I did not choose, but got), but I darn sure intended to mock what I considered was nonsensical chopping of conversations with new threads beginning with "From: ". Reminder: this is SSP and we are talking about intentions, triggers, reactions, memes, process etc.

I do not share any of that as some sort of confession or admission. It was all rather obvious to anyone and everyone, right? The less obvious part is that this is something we all do, all the time. We do not always shoot the gap and exploit loopholes. But we do things that are meant to get reactions. And we react to things. We do this within environments and relationships, both real and virtual. The environment includes all the conditions, not just rules, not just new rules about using "From: ". What we do not all or always do, is willingly surrender to the facts. And by facts, I would include the conditions.
Binger
God
Posts: 6133
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2021 12:34 am
Location: That's the difference. I actually have a Blue Heeler

Re: Biden's Economy?

Post by Binger »

Res Ipsa wrote:
Fri Jan 28, 2022 3:27 pm


All this sounds reasonable to me, but with an asterisk that I’ll address once I’ve read your next posts.
Have at it. See if you can untangle even a bit of it.
Post Reply