Posts Made By: Greg Shaffer

Originally Posted by Brian McFarland

 I see you rose to the bait LOL

Originally Posted by Brian McFarland

Funny how you like to think you're way ahead of everyone. Pretty entertaining.

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

Only 6 responses Greg after they were going to "quit responding".    

 

Originally Posted by James Brown

I thought James and Brian were going to quit responding?  And they have.  Rod, Russ, and me have never suggested that we were going to ignore you. So, no owning here, just another Rich-induced face plant.  I'll reckon you'll say that you were only trolling, and your reading comprehension is just fine?

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

I don't think he's talented enough to be a plumber.  

Perhaps a baker, but he'd probably use too much flour.  

Originally Posted by James Brown

I'm curious how you use the word trolling. 

(1) Does trolling (as you define it) mean that you thought the original opinion piece was stupid or false too and you only posted it to get a reaction? 

(2) Or does trolling in your usage mean that you agree with the opinion piece, but you knew that folks to the left of you would disagree so you posted it to get a reaction?

(3) Or does trolling mean something else?

The way I use the word trolling would be only as in #1 above.  Meaning that you knew the opinion piece was stupid or false, but you used it only as "bait."  That is your prerogative of course, but it is not a very good look for you, in my opinion. 

If you posted as in #2, then this is not trolling in my book.  You read something provocative that you agreed with, you posted it, knowing that those who disagree would react.  This is what we do here, isn't it?  We post and react - it is a discussion forum after all.  Trolling has nothing to do with it.  The few who actually reacted to the article did so in measured tones.    It is not like anyone posted a 500 word rant laced with name-calling and all-caps in reply to your post.  So, if you agree with the original article, I'm curious how this is trolling.  Thanks for any insight.  

Jim

   

Originally Posted by James Brown

Thanks for the reply. 

For the purposes of this side conversation, I am glad you agreed with most of the article before you posted it.  I personally don't think that posting this article is "trolling" since you agreed with a lot of it, but I am OK with your less negative definition of trolling.   I personally would call your post "starting a contentious conversation" rather than trolling. 

I was not trying to be passive aggressive.  I was trying to let anyone who cared know that if you had posted something you personally did not agree with, just to tweak other forum members, that it would reflect poorly on you.  I'd call my position on trolls (as I see them) "active aggressive!"  Either way, you did not troll in the way I define the word, so I am glad about that.   Jim

Originally Posted by Richard Davis

He asked.  I told him I was busy handling his light work on this forum!  

Originally Posted by Rod Kaufman

Huh,?! Rich's' response was somehow "funny"? What cons find funny is underwhelming...except, apparently, in Greg's nose.