Two Plus Two Newer Archives

Two Plus Two Newer Archives (http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/index.php)
-   Politics (http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/forumdisplay.php?f=43)
-   -   *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread (http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/showthread.php?t=558531)

ElliotR 12-01-2007 06:28 AM

*** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
So is mrick Cyrus? Who knows, and who cares, I say. but obviously BluffTHIS! cares *a lot* since he has cluttered up two threads with this "accusation".

I, for one, don't want to see threads derailed into cries of "Cyrus! Cyrus!" with the attendant juvenile name calling every time BluffTHIS! starts to lose an argument. So please, BluffTHIS!, please confine your accusations to this thread, along with supporting links. If you make a coherent and persuasive case I'm sure appropriate action will be taken.

Cheers!

Copernicus 12-01-2007 06:48 AM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
[ QUOTE ]
So is mrick Cyrus? Who knows, and who cares, I say. but obviously BluffTHIS! cares *a lot* since he has cluttered up two threads with this "accusation".

I, for one, don't want to see threads derailed into cries of "Cyrus! Cyrus!" with the attendant juvenile name calling every time BluffTHIS! starts to lose an argument. So please, BluffTHIS!, please confine your accusations to this thread, along with supporting links. If you make a coherent and persuasive case I'm sure appropriate action will be taken.

Cheers!

[/ QUOTE ]

mrick's posts make the case. If he isn't Cyrus, he's managed to capture everything that was so offensive about Cyrus in record time. Ive got him on ignore at this point, and hopefully others will too, and the trolling will die.

MidGe 12-01-2007 07:30 AM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
[ QUOTE ]
So is mrick Cyrus? Who knows, and who cares, I say. but obviously BluffTHIS! cares *a lot* since he has cluttered up two threads with this "accusation".

I, for one, don't want to see threads derailed into cries of "Cyrus! Cyrus!" with the attendant juvenile name calling every time BluffTHIS! starts to lose an argument. So please, BluffTHIS!, please confine your accusations to this thread, along with supporting links. If you make a coherent and persuasive case I'm sure appropriate action will be taken.

Cheers!

[/ QUOTE ]

Good post ElliotR!

zasterguava 12-01-2007 07:46 AM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
cliffnotes?

Taso 12-01-2007 07:46 AM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
[ QUOTE ]
cliffnotes?

[/ QUOTE ]

valenzuela 12-01-2007 09:57 AM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
lol, this forum is awesome

Kaj 12-01-2007 11:17 AM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
FWIW, Bluffthi9stroll spent a month accusing me of being Cyrus. And I believe that was after him accusing another poster of being Cyrus. Or maybe even concurrently.

ConstantineX 12-01-2007 11:28 AM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
Who is this Cyrus that inspires such fear and loathing?

Kaj 12-01-2007 11:36 AM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
[ QUOTE ]
Who is this Cyrus that inspires such fear and loathing?

[/ QUOTE ]

A banned poster who was too outspoken about Israel and deemed a troll for his manner of posting. I'd trade 50 BluffThisTroll's for him, though. But that isn't saying much.

iron81 12-01-2007 11:44 AM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
I think that Bluff has accused between 6 and 10 people of being Cyrus. In fairness, he was correct twice (Mickey Brauch and some 4 post account).

Bill Haywood 12-01-2007 12:14 PM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
BluffThis is Cyrus. Who has done more to make him legendary?

Actually, isn't mrick's signup date previous to the banning?

valenzuela 12-01-2007 12:32 PM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
mrick chances of being cyrus are between 33% and 20%, discuss.

Kaj 12-01-2007 12:38 PM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
[ QUOTE ]
mrick chances of being cyrus are between 33% and 20%, discuss.

[/ QUOTE ]

10 seconds worth of effort to perform a user name search shows that Mickey/Cyrus was banned ~Mar 07 while mrick reg'd Apr 06 and has been a regular since it looks like. Of course, let's not let inconvenient facts or a little sleuthing get in the way of a Bluffthistroll's witch hunt.

valenzuela 12-01-2007 12:43 PM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
mrick chances of being cyrus are between 33% and 20%, discuss.

[/ QUOTE ]

10 seconds worth of effort to perform a user name search shows that Mickey/Cyrus was banned ~Mar 07 while mrick reg'd Apr 06 and has been a regular since it looks like. Of course, let's not let inconvenient facts or a little sleuthing get in the way of a Bluffthistroll's witch hunt.

[/ QUOTE ]

1) I meant that because bluff had accused 6 to 10 ppl and he had been right twice
2) Some of u are missing the point, its not whether mrick is cyrus or not its about how can someone give a [censored] on whether mrick is cyrus or not

Kaj 12-01-2007 12:48 PM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
mrick chances of being cyrus are between 33% and 20%, discuss.

[/ QUOTE ]

10 seconds worth of effort to perform a user name search shows that Mickey/Cyrus was banned ~Mar 07 while mrick reg'd Apr 06 and has been a regular since it looks like. Of course, let's not let inconvenient facts or a little sleuthing get in the way of a Bluffthistroll's witch hunt.

[/ QUOTE ]

1) I meant that because bluff had accused 6 to 10 ppl and he had been right twice
2) Some of u are missing the point, its not whether mrick is cyrus or not its about how can someone give a [censored] on whether mrick is cyrus or not

[/ QUOTE ]

My bad. My comment was aimed at Bluffthis throwing out accusations without the 10 sec worth of effort to show his accusations are almost surely false. I understood that you were throwing out percentages sarcastically but used your comment in making my point. Apologies.

And agree about the "who cares" part. Frankly, I'm sure most 2+2ers are more upset that Bluffthistroll came back from his staring contest (w/ pokerbob was it?) than if cyrus came back.

Bill Haywood 12-01-2007 12:52 PM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
I'm Cyrus!

Now everyone...

(apologies to Kirk Douglas, Spartacus)

DVaut1 12-01-2007 01:48 PM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
[ QUOTE ]
I think that Bluff has accused between 6 and 10 people of being Cyrus. In fairness, he was correct twice (Mickey Brauch and some 4 post account).

[/ QUOTE ]

Giving credit to BT for 'outing' Mickey Brauch as Cyrus is specious at best since everyone knew it anyway. The 4 post account, okay, I'll give credit where credit is due.

DVaut1 12-01-2007 01:49 PM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
[ QUOTE ]
And agree about the "who cares" part.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm pretty sure jman also cares.

DVaut1 12-01-2007 01:50 PM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Who is this Cyrus that inspires such fear and loathing?

[/ QUOTE ]

A banned poster who was too outspoken about Israel and deemed a troll for being too outspoken about Israel

[/ QUOTE ]

zasterguava 12-01-2007 02:11 PM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
let me guess.... he was anti-Isreal? ah the irony...

vulturesrow 12-01-2007 02:33 PM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
mrick chances of being cyrus are between 33% and 20%, discuss.

[/ QUOTE ]

10 seconds worth of effort to perform a user name search shows that Mickey/Cyrus was banned ~Mar 07 while mrick reg'd Apr 06 and has been a regular since it looks like. Of course, let's not let inconvenient facts or a little sleuthing get in the way of a Bluffthistroll's witch hunt.

[/ QUOTE ]

And this proves he isnt the same person how?

Kaj 12-01-2007 05:05 PM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
mrick chances of being cyrus are between 33% and 20%, discuss.

[/ QUOTE ]

10 seconds worth of effort to perform a user name search shows that Mickey/Cyrus was banned ~Mar 07 while mrick reg'd Apr 06 and has been a regular since it looks like. Of course, let's not let inconvenient facts or a little sleuthing get in the way of a Bluffthistroll's witch hunt.

[/ QUOTE ]

And this proves he isnt the same person how?

[/ QUOTE ]

Proof? Where did I claim to "prove" anything? Even a court of law only requires reasonable doubt. I just gave you plenty of grounds for that. So where's the "proof" that he is in fact Cyrus? Let us see it.

vulturesrow 12-01-2007 05:42 PM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
mrick chances of being cyrus are between 33% and 20%, discuss.

[/ QUOTE ]

10 seconds worth of effort to perform a user name search shows that Mickey/Cyrus was banned ~Mar 07 while mrick reg'd Apr 06 and has been a regular since it looks like. Of course, let's not let inconvenient facts or a little sleuthing get in the way of a Bluffthistroll's witch hunt.

[/ QUOTE ]

And this proves he isnt the same person how?

[/ QUOTE ]

Proof? Where did I claim to "prove" anything? Even a court of law only requires reasonable doubt. I just gave you plenty of grounds for that. So where's the "proof" that he is in fact Cyrus? Let us see it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok Im really not down with getting involved in this drama. I just thought it was ridiculous to use that as proof or even reasonable doubt in the case of a person that was known to have used more than one account. It might raise a hint of doubt but thats about it. As for proving, I really dont care if it is or isnt Cyrus. I could find out pretty easily if I cared since we correspond via email from time to time. But I will enjoy this thread too much to short circuit it at this point in time.

BluffTHIS! 12-01-2007 07:36 PM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
[ QUOTE ]
If he isn't Cyrus, he's managed to capture everything that was so offensive about Cyrus in record time.

[/ QUOTE ]


I have the following points to make in this little tempest in the forum teacup, if it is even that.

1) As Copernicus said, if the posting account in question isn't Cyrus, he's managed to copy not just his style, but his intentional lying distortion of the views of others, and his intentional use of logical fallacies.

2) Whether people here think otherwise or not, I don't care about others having differing viewpoints on issues, including Israel. However I care a lot about deliberately misleading and lying "debate". That is what mrick is doing.

3) As iron notes, I have cried wolf before, but also been right before. Regarding Cyrus' MB account, I spotted him very early on and no one else agreed, but lo and behold a THOUSAND+ posts later, it's suddenly clear to everyone and that account got banned.

4) I myself have made exactly two gimmick accounts on this site, one of which is now banned, to do or make what I thought were pranks. However I have never made one post (out of less than 10 made with those accounts) in either this or the SMP forum. I don't feel a need to hide behind other identities to make my views known.

5) ElliotRichardson and others have in the past expressed great indignation when the subject of gimmick accusations have been made. Why is that? Because they themselves use them and also wish trollish and dishonest banned posters to be able to as well, when those posters agree with their viewpoints.

6) Simple IP checks are insufficient to determine this question as people use methods to mask same (imagine caring enough to do that on an internet forum like this!), and also by using different ones at home and work can also avoid detection. The fact is that all of Cyrus' proven accounts have different IP addresses.


So to repeat, I don't care whose views differ from mine. If we all agreed there would be no point in this forum. It would just be a dittohead forum. But what I care about is honest debate. Intentional distortions and use of logical fallacies are not that. But of course that doesn't mean some posters just don't think well and can't be honestly stupid (think of Mr. 10 smilies-per-post).



P.S. ElliotR is a weenie and political hack.
P.S.S. iron you never answered my prop bet question in the PM.

The once and future king 12-01-2007 07:55 PM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
Its worth pointing out to the those not in the know that the reason some are being so aggressive about cyrus is that he regularly crushed them in debate.

Most of if not all of the mud slinging and accusations constitute the archest hypocrisy and pot meet kettle.

BluffTHIS! 12-01-2007 08:06 PM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
[ QUOTE ]
Its worth pointing out to the those not in the know that the reason some are being so aggressive about cyrus is that he regularly crushed them in debate.

Most of if not all of the mud slinging and accusations constitute the archest hypocrisy and pot meet kettle.

[/ QUOTE ]


It's worth pointing out that that a great many posters here who don't think well logically admired Cyrus a lot and were snowed by his method.

The Cyrus method of debate:

1) minutely parse another poster's post and reply line by line;

2) throw in as many irrelevant links as possible to sources to show erudition and seeming knowledge, when in reality it only shows skill with search engines;

3) intentionally distort the views of the poster being responded to;

4) use a couple logical fallacies to dupe the logically challenged, as is done in political commercials all the time and use bold and italic font to highlight same;

5) construct and tear down strawmen;

6) throw in some more irrelvant to the issue at hand remarks in order to obscure the above;

7) claim the poster has been refuted;

8) refuse to be pinned down one sub-issue at a time when the above is replied to and instead insist on replying to multiple points only so as to obscure the errors and make others think "where there's smoke there's fire";

9) reap the admiration of the gullible;

10) rinse and repeat.

The once and future king 12-01-2007 08:31 PM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
Excuses excuses, or what I tell myself to help my self esteem deal with the fact that Cyrus kicked my arse with steady reasoned debate on an allmost constant basis, by bluffthis.

Phil153 12-01-2007 08:36 PM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
In Cyrus' defense he was specifically named by Sklansky, along with El Diablo, as some who was "smart" and "has obviously thought about things". So I'd say DS probably disagrees with a few of BT's caricatures.

BluffTHIS! 12-01-2007 10:02 PM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
[ QUOTE ]
In Cyrus' defense he was specifically named by Sklansky, along with El Diablo, as some who was "smart" and "has obviously thought about things". So I'd say DS probably disagrees with a few of BT's caricatures.

[/ QUOTE ]


Phil,

Reading comprehension matters. I too believe Cyrus to be highly intelligent. What I am discussing is the dishonest ends/means to which he uses that intelligence in political debate. And when I talk about the gullible and stupid, I am referring to those who believe his lies and distortions. However anything Cyrus says about blackjack is probably worth reading as he is an expert in same.

Kaj 12-01-2007 10:04 PM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
mrick chances of being cyrus are between 33% and 20%, discuss.

[/ QUOTE ]

10 seconds worth of effort to perform a user name search shows that Mickey/Cyrus was banned ~Mar 07 while mrick reg'd Apr 06 and has been a regular since it looks like. Of course, let's not let inconvenient facts or a little sleuthing get in the way of a Bluffthistroll's witch hunt.

[/ QUOTE ]

And this proves he isnt the same person how?

[/ QUOTE ]

Proof? Where did I claim to "prove" anything? Even a court of law only requires reasonable doubt. I just gave you plenty of grounds for that. So where's the "proof" that he is in fact Cyrus? Let us see it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok Im really not down with getting involved in this drama. I just thought it was ridiculous to use that as proof or even reasonable doubt in the case of a person that was known to have used more than one account....

[/ QUOTE ]


Why would Cyrus have come back as Mickey Brausch once he was banned if he was already actively using the mrick account? You really don't think there's even a hint of "reasonable doubt" here? I sincerely hope you never serve on a jury or court-martial, sir.

pvn 12-01-2007 10:39 PM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
[ QUOTE ]
Its worth pointing out to the those not in the know that the reason some are being so aggressive about cyrus is that he regularly crushed them in debate.

Most of if not all of the mud slinging and accusations constitute the archest hypocrisy and pot meet kettle.

[/ QUOTE ]

If by "crushed" you mean "used tons of ten-dollar words, cleveryly constructed logical fallacies, and tons of intellectual dishonesty" then yeah, you're right. And I try not to throw the "intellectually dishonest" label around as freely as many here do.

Cyrus is a smart guy, no doubt. And he did OK in debates, but for every debate he did well in there was another one where he limped around on (very well-camouflaged) bait-and-switches.

pvn 12-01-2007 10:40 PM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
[ QUOTE ]
In Cyrus' defense he was specifically named by Sklansky, along with El Diablo, as some who was "smart" and "has obviously thought about things". So I'd say DS probably disagrees with a few of BT's caricatures.

[/ QUOTE ]

Cyrus had definitely thought about alot of things. One of the things he thought a lot about was winning debates through deceit and lawyering.

pvn 12-01-2007 10:40 PM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
[ QUOTE ]
Why would Cyrus have come back as Mickey Brausch once he was banned if he was already actively using the mrick account?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not convinced that mrick = cyrus, but Cyrus is NOT dumb and he was SO transparent in posting as MB that he had to figure that someone would catch on and give him the boot.

BluffTHIS! 12-01-2007 10:43 PM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
[ QUOTE ]
through deceit and lawyering.

[/ QUOTE ]


ElliotR resembles that remark. Knowing that someone is a lawyer makes the odds he is a liar better than 50/50.

DVaut1 12-01-2007 11:13 PM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
[ QUOTE ]
If by "crushed" you mean "used tons of ten-dollar words, cleveryly constructed logical fallacies, and tons of intellectual dishonesty" then yeah, you're right. And I try not to throw the "intellectually dishonest" label around as freely as many here do.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've yet to understand the magical distinction between "intellectual dishonesty" and "non-intellectual dishonest". Corollary to that, I don't think I've ever seen a compelling argument that "intellectual dishonesty" means anything more than "I have a fundamental disagreement with this poster but I'm out of relevant objections to what they're saying and yet they continue to disagree with me, so I'm going to accuse them of intellectual dishonesty and hope the [censored] sticks".

BluffTHIS! 12-01-2007 11:30 PM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
DV,

Do you see any distinction between two persons who in debate utilize a logical fallacy, perhaps a subtle one, but where one is ignorant of the fact he is so using that fallacy, and the other intentionally uses same in order to mislead?

It seems to me that in debate, we should be seeking to get at the root of our disagreements and examine same. Since two honest debaters can arrive at different conclusions, the usual cause of same is differing axioms, or perhaps unstated premises, on which the logic of the argument rests. But surely the first step in analyzing another's arguments is to see if the logical chain is valid, so as to be able to focus in on the premises and whether they are valid, far-fetched or unprovable, etc.

However if the object of debate is to "win" via any means possible in the manner of a slick lawyer or salesman, then I guess it is only the efficaciousness of the rhetoric to persuade the unthinking or unlearned that matters.

ElliotR 12-02-2007 12:26 AM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
hahahahahahaha This is great!

I must confess, I started this thread because I was about to get on a flight home and wondered what would happen without my ability to respond to the inevitable BluffTHIS! excuse making. Seeing all this 11 hours worth of flying later is a rich reward indeed.

For the record, it will come as no surprise that BluffTHIS! is full of it.

As to his number 3, the notion that he and he alone knew that Mickey was Cyrus at any point is laughable.

And as to number 5, I challenge you to post evidence that I've used gimmick accounts. C'mon, BluffTHIS! Put up or shut up, buster.

BluffTHIS! 12-02-2007 12:58 AM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
The "evidence" is your indignation in the past when I've posted that I believe it is in bad form/spirit to use gimmicks in this forum to make "substantive" posts (as opposed to obvious jokes). By no means conclusive but indicative nonetheless. However are you denying same?

vulturesrow 12-02-2007 01:17 AM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
mrick chances of being cyrus are between 33% and 20%, discuss.

[/ QUOTE ]

10 seconds worth of effort to perform a user name search shows that Mickey/Cyrus was banned ~Mar 07 while mrick reg'd Apr 06 and has been a regular since it looks like. Of course, let's not let inconvenient facts or a little sleuthing get in the way of a Bluffthistroll's witch hunt.

[/ QUOTE ]

And this proves he isnt the same person how?

[/ QUOTE ]

Proof? Where did I claim to "prove" anything? Even a court of law only requires reasonable doubt. I just gave you plenty of grounds for that. So where's the "proof" that he is in fact Cyrus? Let us see it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok Im really not down with getting involved in this drama. I just thought it was ridiculous to use that as proof or even reasonable doubt in the case of a person that was known to have used more than one account....

[/ QUOTE ]


Why would Cyrus have come back as Mickey Brausch once he was banned if he was already actively using the mrick account? You really don't think there's even a hint of "reasonable doubt" here? I sincerely hope you never serve on a jury or court-martial, sir.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure, I'll give you a "hint of a reasonable doubt"; I'm feeling magnanimous tonight. I just hope that I one day possess the acumen and the keen analytical skills to see, as you do, why the registration date matters in the case of a person that was known to use more than one account, on a board where the creation of a new account is trivially easy, sir. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

ElliotR 12-02-2007 01:25 AM

Re: *** Official *** BluffTHIS! Cyrus accusation containment thread
 
[ QUOTE ]
The "evidence" is your indignation in the past when I've posted that I believe it is in bad form/spirit to use gimmicks in this forum to make "substantive" posts (as opposed to obvious jokes). By no means conclusive but indicative nonetheless. However are you denying same?

[/ QUOTE ]

I am indeed. Moreover, I want to see the links to what you call my "indignation".


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:16 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.