Daily Mail

[Wazzerphuk]

Fuck me, who edits their website? I don't think I've ever seen so much use of the passive voice.

Nothing wrong with that; we're not American!


(Haven't actually read anything there so don't know if it's overused. Probably is knowing them.)

 

[Sparx]

i can see where toh is coming from. I live an hour away from my ladyfriend so its hard to meet up everynight. But we talk everyday when i'm at work on MSN so its easier

 

[Cadelin]

I've no idea why I'm compelled to respond but here it is.

You are dealing with the troll wrong. He is not looking for a discussion, he is just looking for a reaction. It doesn't matter how well thought out your response and how much effort you put into writing it he'll just change his trolling tactic and carry on. Once you realise this he'll become much easier to deal with.

Take a look at some of his tactics in this thread:
Personal insults. - This worked on you just now. He has not added anything to the discussion but you have actually spent time and effort trying to explain your point again.

Twisting your words/logic. - Another fairly standard tactic which he has used on you in this thread. He uses what you have said to say something completely different and probably stupid, making you want to reply. He has not mis-read your post, he knows exactly what he is doing.

Ignoring your post - Simple tactic, he ignores the most important parts of your post because he can't answer them, instead he focuses on trying to distract your attention by picking up some minor point. On numerous occasions its made you repeat the same thing over and over again.

Talking bollocks - This is his strong point. On a number of occasions he uses a phrase I have never heard before or constructs his sentences poorly. He does this on purpose to make you think that he may have a reasonable point but due to language issues he hasn't managed to get it across properly. He also rambles lots. Watch him make a statement in his first line (usually bollocks) and then follow it up with a wall of text in an attempt to "prove" the initial statement is true.

The best way to deal with him is to not lose sight of what you have said and just point out what he is trying to do to de-rail the discussion. When you start doing that he quickly stops responding because he doesn't actually have anything to say.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Take a look at some of his tactics in this thread:
Personal insults. - This worked on you just now. He has not added anything to the discussion but you have actually spent time and effort trying to explain your point again.

Actually the point was amde by me and the insults were started by him.

Twisting your words/logic. - Another fairly standard tactic which he has used on you in this thread. He uses what you have said to say something completely different and probably stupid, making you want to reply. He has not mis-read your post, he knows exactly what he is doing.

Again, done nothing of the sort. I've kept on my original point and only defended against his accusations of me.

Ignoring your post - Simple tactic, he ignores the most important parts of your post because he can't answer them, instead he focuses on trying to distract your attention by picking up some minor point. On numerous occasions its made you repeat the same thing over and over again.

Irony at it's best. He ignored half of my post and only concentrated on the first part of the post, assuming that i claim that instant messaging destroys social interaction completely. I am the one who ahd to repeat this several times.

Talking bollocks - This is his strong point. On a number of occasions he uses a phrase I have never heard before or constructs his sentences poorly. He does this on purpose to make you think that he may have a reasonable point but due to language issues he hasn't managed to get it across properly. He also rambles lots. Watch him make a statement in his first line (usually bollocks) and then follow it up with a wall of text in an attempt to "prove" the initial statement is true.

Yes, i am ofcourse doing this on purpose. Gods forbid me being from a non-native-english country.

Watch my original post and how i explained in what contet the point should be taken with.

I've said it before Cadelin, you can analyze me all you want, but atleast use facts and not your personal info. Again you've come to a thread, added nothing and just attacked me.

EDIT: Actually i've noticed what i DO do wrong; care about twats like you. I'll stop that in the future and keep to the point.

 

[Cadelin]

Actually the point was amde by me and the insults were started by him.

TROLL ALERT
And you are straight in with the twisting logic. All I said was that you insulted him which you did and that caused him to respond.

Again, done nothing of the sort. I've kept on my original point and only defended against his accusations of me.

As I have just demonstrated above you do try and change what people say to answer a different point.

Irony at it's best. He ignored half of my post and only concentrated on the first part of the post, assuming that i claim that instant messaging destroys social interaction completely. I am the one who ahd to repeat this several times.

Once again you ignore the point. You are ignoring what nath is saying and you are not making an attempt to rectify this. Don't try and justify your behaviour by blaming him (again).

Yes, i am ofcourse doing this on purpose. Gods forbid me being from a non-native-english country.

Your English is fine and if you were actually worried about there being an error in translation you would be prepared to explain things again or ask politely if there was something that you didn't quite understand. You don't do this, infact the last time I pointed out that what you had said didn't make sense, you just told me that it did make sense and refused to elaborate. Would you like me to link to that particular thread again?

Watch my original post and how i explained in what contet the point should be taken with.

I've said it before Cadelin, you can analyze me all you want, but atleast use facts and not your personal info. Again you've come to a thread, added nothing and just attacked me.

And back to talking bollocks. I have read your original post, you don't put it in context you just say "its fact". Also what "personal info" do I use against you?

EDIT: Actually i've noticed what i DO do wrong; care about twats like you. I'll stop that in the future and keep to the point.

Back to the personal insults again I see. But let me guess, I didn't add anything to this thread so its ok for you to act like a tool?

 

[old.Tohtori]

Back to the personal insults again I see. But let me guess, I didn't add anything to this thread so its ok for you to act like a tool?

Read the last line of my last post again. *waves*

 

[TdC]

 

[old.Tohtori]

I prefer:

For the sheer manliness.

 

[TdC]

but the pretty sparklies! they're pretty! and sparkly! there is a secret message in the sparklies too, if you look closely enough.

 

[old.Tohtori]

but the pretty sparklies! they're pretty! and sparkly! there is a secret message in the sparklies too, if you look closely enough.

Oh i see now...you dirty old bastard

That's sneaky.

Also the sparklies would work as a distraction and aid in the bashing of head

 

[Cadelin]

EDIT: Actually i've noticed what i DO do wrong; care about twats like you. I'll stop that in the future and keep to the point.

2 posts later.....

I prefer:

For the sheer manliness.

Well that was an epic fail in trying to keep to the point I see.

 

[Sparx]

But cad if you know he's a troll why are you insisting on getting your point across, and not just ignore him? We all know what Toh is like he tends to have a different view about everything and will fight it to the end

 

[Cadelin]

But cad if you know he's a troll why are you insisting on getting your point across, and not just ignore him? We all know what Toh is like he tends to have a different view about everything and will fight it to the end

An excellent question. I have tried putting him on my ignore list like I have Gorbachioo however unlike Gorbachioo, Toh posts in just about every single thread on these forums and not just ones about the end of the world/oil prices. This makes it annoying because Toh does not troll in every thread and I can't selectively ignore him.

Secondly and more importantly he actually goes so far as to stop other people posting because they get so frustrated with him. The last time I pointed this out it was Pikeh who had got pissed off with him and now its Nath. Passively ignoring him doesn't stop him ruining threads and annoying the fuck out of other people. The best thing to do is to try and educate people so he will stop doing it.

 

[Sparx]

Then this goes round full circle of trying to educate Daily Mail readers that their paper is no better than red tops

 

[old.Tohtori]

But cad if you know he's a troll why are you insisting on getting your point across, and not just ignore him? We all know what Toh is like he tends to have a different view about everything and will fight it to the end

Which like i've said, is not true. People just bring that up as an excuse if i DO disagree on something or hold a different view.

Plenty, plenty, plenty threads where i agree with things and hold similar views, plenty of people agree with me on my views too, most do it via rep or pm though.

The problem comes with people not talking about the issue, but infact doing that lovely thing called "come to thread, bash tohtori". And they think they're BETTER for not even trying to discuss something and just troll at me.

But, as i said, i'll try to ignore twats like that from now on as THAT is the reason threads sidetrack, me, gods forbid, defending against accusations that have no relevance to the thread. You can see it on this thread too. Just go see if you can pinpoint where the thread sidetracked. Could it be because of nath attacking me personally and not even discussing the thread in question?

How about the other thread Mr Cadelin mentioned? Where me and pikeh were talking about it, both got a bit angry, but we talked it through. Then Mr Cadelin brings a lovely sidetrack on it by, attacking my post style and not commenting on the issue at all

And f*ck yes i'll fight things to the end

 

[Sparx]

i have to say i've clashed with you a fair few times, but we have also agreed many times too so i'm totally out of this one

 

[Scouse]

I prefer:

For the sheer manliness.

There's no such thing as a manly handbag. If you're a man, and you carry a bag that isn't a rucksack, you're actually a girl.