Talk:Lightning rod

Aren't many users on here lightning rods? Heart♥Gold ^tx 23:43, 1 July 2007 (CDT)

Hmmm, no, just you. And we appreciate your suffering for the cause. I wish you weren't a token - and appreciate that you removed that from your user page. Honestly. human^{be in} 03:17, 2 July 2007 (CDT)

Ann Coulter deserves more respect that this. Insults are frowned upon. Heart♥Gold ^tx 00:57, 3 July 2007 (CDT)

Respect must be earned. ollïegrïnd 06:08, 3 July 2007 (CDT)

No, she doesn't deserve ANY respect, because she's a disgusting bloodthirsty bigot. But it would be nice if the people mocking her based it more on her vile political views than her alleged femininity. --Gulik 02:07, 4 July 2007 (CDT)

Um...looking at the article (at least the first part), what's the difference between lightning rod and troll? --Kels 14:52, 20 July 2007 (CDT)

A troll is an amateur, usually anonymous, on the 'nets. A Lighting Rod is a public figure who at least pretends to mean what they say. Or something like that. The realities overlap. human^{be in} 15:20, 20 July 2007 (CDT)

My edit war with Bohdan

Hiya Bohdan, you keep wwanting to define MiddleMan as a lightning rod. Please give your justification here. A lightning rod has to meet two criterion - issuing strong inflammatory statements that rile the masses, and also being attacked wherever they can be as a result. TK was a perfect example. On the first count, he rubbed a lot of users the wrong way, and ont eh second, everyone crapped all over his talk page in response. HG has suffered a similar position over the last week, with an essay he was writing, at least. One point one, check, point two, people turned up just to snip on its talk page. Just sniping on its own is trolling.

So I ask two questions: One, can you show me at least three diffs coming from and going back at MiddleMan, and then justify listing a user on RW at all in the article. Pretty please. human^{be in} 17:58, 20 July 2007 (CDT)

MiddleMan is one of the most extreme users here. In fact, of all the liberals I have heard, he might be the most extreme. He made has made plenty of statements that were way out there, statements that most liberals would not agree with, in fact they might even attack him themselves. Maybe he hasn't been attacked here, but who is going to attack him? I have no interest, and HG is far too polite. He was banned at CP. As far as putting him in the article, I think it illustrates the point. But, you're the admin so I will abide by your rules. However, if you were tmtoulouse, then of course I would fight you till the day I die. Resident vandal

• Lets compromise: Michael Savage and MiddleMan. Resident vandal 18:11, 20 July 2007 (CDT)

Banned at Conservapedia? WOW! For such a bastion of rationality and openness to do such a thing, MiddleMan must be the Second Coming of Che Guevara!!!!@!!

</sarcasm>Seriously, what's he written that's so "radical" and "inflammatory"? Feel free to post links.--67.102.192.7 19:19, 20 July 2007 (CDT) (Gulik, not at home & forgot my password.)

Not only has he professed admiration for the murderous Soviet Union, he has made openly offensive comments about Americans. He represents the extreme, fundamentalist left. Resident vandal

Or maybe he's just yanking your chain. Here on Planet Reality, we have a concept called "Humor". I understand Earth-Conservative has a similar idea, although it revolves mostly around watching poor people suffer. --Gulik 22:51, 20 July 2007 (CDT)

MiddleMan's beloved Soviet Union watched alot of poor people suffer. Resident vandal

Hey, Bo, I understand your anger, re: USSR. But MiddleMan dopes not yet meet the criterion I asked for above. Does he yank your chain (by the way, your English is stronger than any Ukrainian I have ever met!). Maybe. But is he a "lightning rod"? Probably not. Banned on CP? Uh, as most of "us" were. Have you checked out my "political compass"? Again, we ask for edits to justify the inclusion. I could justify HG, but see no point in doing so. human^{be in} 23:53, 20 July 2007 (CDT)

I do know how to read? Like I said, its your decision. tmt is the only admin who I will rebel against. Resident vandal

• speaking of that political test, I re-took it and was more liberal. I think my time here is starting to wear off on me. Resident vandal

My thoughts

I really don't know what to do. RW devotes much time to attacking CP sysops, and also much time attacking Blogs4Brownback contributors. What is the rationale for not including MiddleMan? I certainly think he (and others) is a lighting rod. If Bohdan wants to communicate this on RW, what do you propose Human? Heart♥Gold^{Jump up and down} 00:04, 21 July 2007 (CDT)

RW is not devoted to bashing CP. Obvioulsy some editors are into it, so I get to read the Best of CP and get my lulz. B4B? It's parody to start with! And some enjoy writing about it, I guess. I ask for the rationale to include MiddleMan, no to disclude him. As I have said, HG is an example of one, or at least, was last week. I also asked, do we cite RW editors here? Because if we do, I wqould include TK and HG. human^{be in} 00:49, 21 July 2007 (CDT)

The B4B people really are pretty strange. Resident vandal

I think it is subtle satire, based in some truth. For example, I understand a more than average about electricity and thermodynamics, and while I can explain how a toaster oven works using models form these fields, the fact of the matter is, I cannot explain how a toaster oven works. At some point, my models stop, and I have to resort to "because that is what we have observed." So the point about the B4B contributor who said something to the effect that he has yet to meet somebody who can explain how a toaster oven works might be as philosophically correct as when he wrote that "heavier objects DO fall faster". That is, I suspect the B4B contributor to be a very clever troll, using true arguments that on their face appear to be false to make larger points, e.g., that God does open our eyes (e.g., in inventions). I certainly know that I have had solutions to problems sitting in front of me for a lot longer (than they should have), and once I realize it, I wonder "why did I not see it earlier"? The skeptical point of view is "because you had a brain fart." But it makes you think, and to that extent, B4B posters may not be as strange as they might seem. Heart♥Gold^{Jump up and down} 00:12, 21 July 2007 (CDT)

I have never actually read it, only whats written about it here. Resident vandal

Same here. I should go check it out. I think MiddleMan may be taking them too literally, though, instead of fodder for self reflection. Heart♥Gold^{Jump up and down} 00:18, 21 July 2007 (CDT)

B4B is the funniest parody since what we thought conservapedia was, unitl we realized they were serious. human^{be in} 00:49, 21 July 2007 (CDT)

By the way, HG, your graph shows that the speed of attraction does not really change until the other object is pretty much the mass of the moon. Oh, I am so pwned... human^{be in} 00:49, 21 July 2007 (CDT)

So me saying "Glory to the motherland" is justification for calling me a lightning rod? Why don't you attack me for my membership of the pernicious liberal swarm, my role in the low-flow toilet conspiracy, or me being a brick and a commie (it's all on my userpage.) There's a place for humor on RW, especially talk pages.

Can you provide me with more examples of "extremely librul" statements (by the way, I'm considered a centrist in my own country.) MiddleMan 14:54, 21 July 2007 (CDT)

Examples

A bit lacking, right?? There's Ann Coulter, someone who there isnt an article for and then conservapedia... and thats it. 17:38, 27 May 2011 (UTC)