Purposes and goals of mindfucks

[LMNO]

I don't mind the hotlinking, but it bothers me when people pick apart metaphors and then take one bit literally, merely to try to "prove" the metaphor doesn't apply to them.

Then the argument turns to the metaphor, and not the meaning behind it.

[Captain Utopia]

It bothers me when people make unequivocal statements about easily-verifiable things without first doing any research to make sure they are actually right.

i think the little geotia's point was
if you dont know where you are on the map,
you dont know where to start

Speaking from a radial perspective, I disagree completely. But I'm not married to that perspective, it's just a useful model.

That thing you do, where you hotlink a word in your post so that in order to pick up context or a joke one have to break one's chain of thought and tediously follow an external link, which 99% of the time turns out to be either stupid or pure laziness on your part for not including the context in your post... where did you pick up that odious habit?

I wish I were the professor of PD.com so I could flunk you for doing it.

All I was saying above is that I find one particular model useful as it seems to quite accurately categorise two methods of evaluation. I linked to that model because the terminology is not going to make much sense if are unfamiliar with it in that context. I think the model is useful because it basically says "you're both right, but in different ways, and towards slightly different types of problem"

I'm not sure how this is odious. Would you flunk wikipedia, and tvtropes too, and the rest of the internet?

[LMNO]

To break it down:

NotARealFurby's post was a metaphor using "map" as a poetic term.

You decided to ignore the metaphor, and discuss radial vs cartesian mapping systems.

You then linked to an essay that used the two kinds of maps in a completely different way metaphorically.

Nigel (Lord Om Fuck) got annoyed.


The end.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

It bothers me when people make unequivocal statements about easily-verifiable things without first doing any research to make sure they are actually right.

i think the little geotia's point was
if you dont know where you are on the map,
you dont know where to start

Speaking from a radial perspective, I disagree completely. But I'm not married to that perspective, it's just a useful model.

That thing you do, where you hotlink a word in your post so that in order to pick up context or a joke one have to break one's chain of thought and tediously follow an external link, which 99% of the time turns out to be either stupid or pure laziness on your part for not including the context in your post... where did you pick up that odious habit?

I wish I were the professor of PD.com so I could flunk you for doing it.

All I was saying above is that I find one particular model useful as it seems to quite accurately categorise two methods of evaluation. I linked to that model because the terminology is not going to make much sense if are unfamiliar with it in that context. I think the model is useful because it basically says "you're both right, but in different ways, and towards slightly different types of problem"

I'm not sure how this is odious. Would you flunk wikipedia, and tvtropes too, and the rest of the internet?

This is, theoretically, a conversation, not research hour at the library. Write clearly, explain yourself as you go, and AS WITH AN ESSAY, the correct way to annotate your references is to footnote them within your post and cite your source. Linking WITHIN YOUR FOOTNOTE is an acceptable way to cite your source. Hotlinking a word to its definition (especially a borderline irrelevant one) is NOT an effective way to communicate. It requires your reader to essentially stop and do external research in the middle of reading your post, in order to make up for your inability to provide adequate context within your post. That is a failure on your part.

[LMNO]

However, some of the rest of us don't mind as much.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I want to find the origin of the new habit of hotlinking words within posts in order to provide context for the post, and burn it down. I will fucking quit the internet if this bullshit becomes prevalent. It's half-assed, it's lazy, it's a hindrance to communication, and whenever I see a hotlinked word in the middle of a sentence that does not itself provide adequate context for the hotlink, I think "FUCK YOU" and I see no reason to continue conversation with the kind of intellectually underdeveloped lazy communicator who employs such a mentally slothful cop-out to actually explaining their point literately.

[LMNO]

Oh, lighten up.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Plus, almost every time the hotlink leads to something that is either largely irrelevant, attempts to redefine terms being used in a way that defies general consensus, or that the poster thinks is fucking FUNNY and isn't relevant to the post in any meaningful way, thereby completely wasting my fucking time and causing me to write them off as an asshole and not bother with anything else they post.

At least when reference links are left unmasked, I can look at the URL and decide whether I want to waste my time on it.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Oh, lighten up.

No, you.

[Cain]

Hi everyone

[fomenter]

I want to find the origin of the new habit of hotlinking words within posts in order to provide context for the post, and burn it down. I will fucking quit the internet if this bullshit becomes prevalent. It's half-assed, it's lazy, it's a hindrance to communication, and whenever I see a hotlinked word in the middle of a sentence that does not itself provide adequate context for the hotlink, I think "FUCK YOU" and I see no reason to continue conversation with the kind of intellectually underdeveloped lazy communicator who employs such a mentally slothful cop-out to actually explaining their point literately.

i blame TV tropes for the habit, they probably didn't start it but their entire site is based on hotlink trolling their readers, because every fucking definition is made up using other hot-linked words leading to definitions made up of hot-linked words if their dam site wasn't interesting as hell it would need to be burned to the ground

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

It bothers me when people make unequivocal statements about easily-verifiable things without first doing any research to make sure they are actually right.

i think the little geotia's point was
if you dont know where you are on the map,
you dont know where to start

Speaking from a radial perspective, I disagree completely. But I'm not married to that perspective, it's just a useful model.

That thing you do, where you hotlink a word in your post so that in order to pick up context or a joke one have to break one's chain of thought and tediously follow an external link, which 99% of the time turns out to be either stupid or pure laziness on your part for not including the context in your post... where did you pick up that odious habit?

I wish I were the professor of PD.com so I could flunk you for doing it.

All I was saying above is that I find one particular model useful as it seems to quite accurately categorise two methods of evaluation. I linked to that model because the terminology is not going to make much sense if are unfamiliar with it in that context. I think the model is useful because it basically says "you're both right, but in different ways, and towards slightly different types of problem"

I'm not sure how this is odious. Would you flunk wikipedia, and tvtropes too, and the rest of the internet?

All I'm saying here is that a forum post is not a reference site and shouldn't be full of hotlinks to help the author explain something they're too lazy to spell out concisely.

[Captain Utopia]

If I had t

It bothers me when people make unequivocal statements about easily-verifiable things without first doing any research to make sure they are actually right.

i think the little geotia's point was
if you dont know where you are on the map,
you dont know where to start

Speaking from a radial perspective, I disagree completely. But I'm not married to that perspective, it's just a useful model.

That thing you do, where you hotlink a word in your post so that in order to pick up context or a joke one have to break one's chain of thought and tediously follow an external link, which 99% of the time turns out to be either stupid or pure laziness on your part for not including the context in your post... where did you pick up that odious habit?

I wish I were the professor of PD.com so I could flunk you for doing it.

All I was saying above is that I find one particular model useful as it seems to quite accurately categorise two methods of evaluation. I linked to that model because the terminology is not going to make much sense if are unfamiliar with it in that context. I think the model is useful because it basically says "you're both right, but in different ways, and towards slightly different types of problem"

I'm not sure how this is odious. Would you flunk wikipedia, and tvtropes too, and the rest of the internet?

This is, theoretically, a conversation, not research hour at the library. Write clearly, explain yourself as you go, and AS WITH AN ESSAY, the correct way to annotate your references is to footnote them within your post and cite your source. Linking WITHIN YOUR FOOTNOTE is an acceptable way to cite your source. Hotlinking a word to its definition (especially a borderline irrelevant one) is NOT an effective way to communicate. It requires your reader to essentially stop and do external research in the middle of reading your post, in order to make up for your inability to provide adequate context within your post. That is a failure on your part.

Dude. It was two sentences. Each small enough to fit on the same line. The hot-linked word was the fourth word.

That this utterly destroyed your concentration was a failure on my part?

Explain how the definition was (in any way) irrelevant when that was the original source for me picking up the definition that I was using.

You don't always need a map to get somewhere useful, sometimes you can just point to the nearest hill and say "let's take another look from there". Doesn't matter if it's a local maxima as long as you don't say on your little hill forever.

On second thought, if it becomes popular convention it will be a great opportunity to bring back goatse.

You know, I've managed to never see goatse. For a while I thought I was just incredibly fortunate, but now I just kind of assume that it can't be all that bad.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Dude. It was two sentences. Each small enough to fit on the same line. The hot-linked word was the fourth word.

That this utterly destroyed your concentration was a failure on my part?

Explain how the definition was (in any way) irrelevant when that was the original source for me picking up the definition that I was using.

You don't always need a map to get somewhere useful, sometimes you can just point to the nearest hill and say "let's take another look from there". Doesn't matter if it's a local maxima as long as you don't say on your little hill forever.

On second thought, if it becomes popular convention it will be a great opportunity to bring back goatse.

You know, I've managed to never see goatse. For a while I thought I was just incredibly fortunate, but now I just kind of assume that it can't be all that bad.

It didn't "destroy my concentration", you utter retard. It wasted my time. The fact that you hotlinked to make your point in a post so short it wasn't even worth reading just makes it even more stupid and lazy.

[Captain Utopia]