But in this instance and several others (like the ones listed in my original comment) these “doomers” ended up right. You can’t deny that these anons were called doomers by many here, and yet their perspective/insight not only proved valid, but the most proactive and realistic, out of most, if not all here. I’m sure you don’t even remember most of the theories talked about on x22, stickied and uprooted predictions that held no impact or even validity, in the context of now and future forward.
I just think valid (obviously not shill) insights/perspectives should not be quickly labeled as “dooming”. Because skepticism and even arguably cynicism has been dismissed and labelled here as dooming faaar too often. These hopiums are far more often turning into ideas that are neither entirely correct or helpful, particularly this as case and point. The labeled doomers were far more correct and helpful in instances like these.
The bigger issue seems to be one of presentation. Having an opinion contrary to prevailing thought is a lot of how research and new insights can be discovered and shared. Indeed that draws out stimulating conversation and helps the community.
I think the point u/sun_wolf was making (please correct me if I'm wrong) is just this: regardless if you were correct in your assumptions, many people don't want to hear them when they are mixed with non-witty diatribe.
For example, you may have been 100% correct about sussman's verdict, but I don't care as much as I should due to you driving your point home while saying I should feel butthurt due to all the pounding I've taken being an FBI depository.
If your method of communication includes your point and also calling me a glowie nazi who should rot in the 7th circle of hell just because I didn't admit your point is the only correct one without giving it more than 5 minutes thought..... well yeah, I may have an issue with that person dispite how right they were.
This is the kind of stuff happening lately. I think we can come up with these conclusions without the antics.
Not you personally of course, just driving the point home. My $0.02.
I definitely hear you and agree 100%, and maybe I poorly communicated with lack of examples, but I intended to express that the diatribes/name-calling/bashing you mention, is exactly the rhetoric many of these labeled “doomers” face. I get that this is the common reaction when dealing with actual shills/glowies, but several anons are being degraded and insulted as if they were actual shills/glowies, for plain or even well thought-out theories that are skeptical/doubtful of the more popular ones here.
I’m sure theres probably users that go full-on lash out when expressing their own theories and encountering criticism/doubt, but the way I’ve seen “doomers” get dragged through the mud and taunted, when delivery wasn’t offensive/questionable... It makes me wonder about the direction of GAW as we go through the storm.
But in this instance and several others (like the ones listed in my original comment) these “doomers” ended up right. You can’t deny that these anons were called doomers by many here, and yet their perspective/insight not only proved valid, but the most proactive and realistic, out of most, if not all here. I’m sure you don’t even remember most of the theories talked about on x22, stickied and uprooted predictions that held no impact or even validity, in the context of now and future forward.
I just think valid (obviously not shill) insights/perspectives should not be quickly labeled as “dooming”. Because skepticism and even arguably cynicism has been dismissed and labelled here as dooming faaar too often. These hopiums are far more often turning into ideas that are neither entirely correct or helpful, particularly this as case and point. The labeled doomers were far more correct and helpful in instances like these.
For the most part, spot on.
The bigger issue seems to be one of presentation. Having an opinion contrary to prevailing thought is a lot of how research and new insights can be discovered and shared. Indeed that draws out stimulating conversation and helps the community.
I think the point u/sun_wolf was making (please correct me if I'm wrong) is just this: regardless if you were correct in your assumptions, many people don't want to hear them when they are mixed with non-witty diatribe.
For example, you may have been 100% correct about sussman's verdict, but I don't care as much as I should due to you driving your point home while saying I should feel butthurt due to all the pounding I've taken being an FBI depository.
If your method of communication includes your point and also calling me a glowie nazi who should rot in the 7th circle of hell just because I didn't admit your point is the only correct one without giving it more than 5 minutes thought..... well yeah, I may have an issue with that person dispite how right they were.
This is the kind of stuff happening lately. I think we can come up with these conclusions without the antics.
Not you personally of course, just driving the point home. My $0.02.
I definitely hear you and agree 100%, and maybe I poorly communicated with lack of examples, but I intended to express that the diatribes/name-calling/bashing you mention, is exactly the rhetoric many of these labeled “doomers” face. I get that this is the common reaction when dealing with actual shills/glowies, but several anons are being degraded and insulted as if they were actual shills/glowies, for plain or even well thought-out theories that are skeptical/doubtful of the more popular ones here.
I’m sure theres probably users that go full-on lash out when expressing their own theories and encountering criticism/doubt, but the way I’ve seen “doomers” get dragged through the mud and taunted, when delivery wasn’t offensive/questionable... It makes me wonder about the direction of GAW as we go through the storm.