Sealioning (also spelled sea-lioning and sea lioning) is a type of trolling or harassment that consists of pursuing people with persistent requests for evidence or repeated questions, while maintaining a pretense of civility and sincerity. It may take the form of "incessant, bad-faith invitations to engage in debate".
Is that how you find Ogre's posts? That he only asks questions and doesn't do any research himself?
The type of poster I hate is the one who nips at people's heels like a little yappy dog, following them all over the forum.
Read the thread, not just the last comment. I've had ample opportunity to view his comments over time, and this term seems consistent with his activities. More civil than most, and with more data than most, but his stuff on this thread was exactly that. The response to me was completely disingenuous. It's likely that he's on the click when commenting here, different from most users.
I’m sorry you feel that way, but there is a difference between sea-lioning and having a high standard for proof of the most major crime in US history.
If you want me to support the arrest and hanging of most of our government, media, and industry, and return power to a guy I’d rather not be in power, then I am not granting you a single benefit of the doubt. The consequences are simply too much.
I mean, consider it in the reverse. What standard of proof would you require to disown Q and accept that the world isn’t quite the way he and Trump described?
Would it be pretty high? Because you’ve invested and committed to the reality you’ve accepted based on the evidence you’ve seen?
I’m in the same boat. Everyone is when it comes to the Q stuff.
Luckily, we’re on a research site where we can consider all points of view in an attempt to understand truth about Q.
Don’t let people here trick you into thinking “not being convinced by an argument justifying mass executions” is the same thing as being a troll.
Otherwise, you’ll find yourself convinced that everyone who disagrees with you is being disingenuous, and there’s no faster way to destroy a research site than to allow that philosophy to fester.
Shoot I know I said I'd stop speaking with you but fyi I follow his posts because I like contrasting sources of information and find them as informative as any others here.
Thanks. I get the jist, and I'll not bother with him anymore. But help me out: what's "sea lion?" First time I heard that one.
Is that how you find Ogre's posts? That he only asks questions and doesn't do any research himself?
The type of poster I hate is the one who nips at people's heels like a little yappy dog, following them all over the forum.
Read the thread, not just the last comment. I've had ample opportunity to view his comments over time, and this term seems consistent with his activities. More civil than most, and with more data than most, but his stuff on this thread was exactly that. The response to me was completely disingenuous. It's likely that he's on the click when commenting here, different from most users.
I’m sorry you feel that way, but there is a difference between sea-lioning and having a high standard for proof of the most major crime in US history.
If you want me to support the arrest and hanging of most of our government, media, and industry, and return power to a guy I’d rather not be in power, then I am not granting you a single benefit of the doubt. The consequences are simply too much.
I mean, consider it in the reverse. What standard of proof would you require to disown Q and accept that the world isn’t quite the way he and Trump described?
Would it be pretty high? Because you’ve invested and committed to the reality you’ve accepted based on the evidence you’ve seen?
I’m in the same boat. Everyone is when it comes to the Q stuff.
Luckily, we’re on a research site where we can consider all points of view in an attempt to understand truth about Q.
Don’t let people here trick you into thinking “not being convinced by an argument justifying mass executions” is the same thing as being a troll.
Otherwise, you’ll find yourself convinced that everyone who disagrees with you is being disingenuous, and there’s no faster way to destroy a research site than to allow that philosophy to fester.
But you have to argue sincerely to make that work. And you've already used straw man arguments in two different comments to me on this thread.
Shoot I know I said I'd stop speaking with you but fyi I follow his posts because I like contrasting sources of information and find them as informative as any others here.
And lol "always"