Hello Snapzu
My name speaks for itself. I like debunking myths and having intelligent discussions. I did not know all of these types of sites existed before I bought a 3-year domain.
Correct me if I am wrong but if I heavily "participate in discussions, or reply to people’s comments" on my own topics that would be acceptable under TOS. The TOS states If over 10% and ( meaning in addition) you do not "participate...." I mostly will be creating my own stuff and starting my own tribe so I can reply promptly. Since I write more in the research format, give detailed responses and know a lot about my topic before I post, It can be time-consuming to post in multiple threads.
Honestly, the internet is riddled with too much bias, uneducated opinions, embellishments and false facts. If I can get one person to think or debate educationally, I did my job.
Thanks for the invite and I hope to be welcomed!
Join the Discussion
Welcome! I think the 10% rule is more of a measure to make sure people don't spam this community with just their own content. Even when running a tribe, posting 90% content from other sources and 10% as your source is the acceptable approach on social aggregation websites like these. Looking forward to seeing some of your posts.
What I was trying to say was I would like to post well over 10% with my content. From my understanding, the TOS states "If over 10% AND you do not participate". Since "and" means in addition, I could post over 10% as long as I am active in my post.
Since I write using the research format and I will participate heavily answering questions, having discussions and supporting my argument, that usually takes up a lot of my time.
As you can see here, I respond to every comment, I will not be selling anything and all of my work is cited. I would think that would be acceptable as spam is usually commercial, irrelevant and inappropriate.
Reddit ( not very intellectual, hoping here is better): has the same rule but no issues since I comment and also use text posts.
Newsvine (a lot of bias): Self promotion is acceptable as long as it is text post and not links.
Hubski (mostly dead): self-promotion is fine as long as it is not spammy in nature.
I like to ensure I respect the rules, and very transparent (my name matches my site)and am welcome. That is why I am asking first =)
Honestly, I wish I knew of all these sites before I bought a 3-year web host. However, since I am frugal, I will continue to post there too.
Ahoy there, and welcome! I think as long as you're super cool with engagement and also take a moment to post other interesting stuff (generally stuff that interests you!) along with yours, people wont have a problem with it. As for posting comments, you don't need to post comments outside of your own posts if you don't want to, the fact that you're taking the time to interact is all that's needed to make you not look like one of those drive by self promoters.
Wow, that was a fast reply. FYI, I edit my posts a lot after replying!!! Bad habit I know.
Great, I am very technical with rules, so I like to make sure the spirit of the law aligns with the letter =)
Interesting stuff??? Ummm. If you love facts, debate, and educated opinions you will love me. Most don't find that interesting =)
Most of my articles have at least 10 citations and comments another 15 but all I get is ad hominems. However, I clearly point out that you are calling the expert (citation) wrong not I with no actual proof.
I am very active.
Reddit ( not very intellectual, hoping here is better). I reply probably 40 comments a thread because "WOW at the responses" has the same rule but no issues since I comment and also use text posts.
Newsvine (a lot of bias): Same amount of replies. Self-promotion is acceptable as long as it is text post and not links.
Hubski (mostly dead): self-promotion is fine as long as it is not spammy in nature.
Snapzu (pending): I really want someone to even just try to prove me wrong just once. If I get just one person to think, my day is made. Hopefully, that is here!!!
So if I can link instead of having to reformat, you might have made my day. I didn't realize all these places existed before I bought a 3-year web host. I am frugal, so I will continue to use said web host even if nobody views it.
And If I can get clarification on one thing. What is the difference between posting using big "green submit" button on top versus clicking a particular tribe and starting a discussion?
[This comment was removed]
You can get your post started with the big green submit and either save it without assigning tribes, or assign tribes at a later time. It won't be up until you hit publish, so it stays in draft.
Got it, so the big green will supply me with multiple options.
I thought that but I didn't want to hit submit and bam every tribe thinks I am spamming.
Thanks.
That was going on before the Internet was a gleam in DARPA's eye.
True but we are in the technology era. A smartphone should well make you sound smart.
I can't tell you how many times a topic has come up and I have the answers to the questions. People will comment on how smart or informed I am. I tell them it has nothing to do with me being smart and everything to do with the fact that I can pretty much find any information I need as long as I have my smart phone and a data connection.
Edit- To be clear, I'm old and most of my friends are old. A few don't even have phones and a few others still carry flip phones. Just so you understand the demographic I am referring to.
I am going to respectfully correct you. You are not innovative (creating new ideas) but you are smart (very good at learning).
People call me every ad hominem in the book when I call them on their BS. However, they fail to realize why I chose the citation format. I (n=1) am irrelevant, the massive evidence supporting me is not.
Off topic. Is there a way to get notified of replies? I get no notifications here.
I didn't see the part where anything was said about innovation, who or for what are you respectfully correcting. As far as notifications, at the top of the page where the green submit field is are 4 other icons. The one on the far left is the notification history. Tab that and you should see a response.
The above was my attempt at a compliment.
He stated:
Yes, doing something as simple as looking something up before spewing nonsense is being smart. Looking something up to ensure accuracy means you are thorough, thirsty and will retain at lease some of the knowledge. So he should stop selling himself short to those people =)
However, researching (like I do) is not innovative. So he is smart by definition. Innovative? Maybe I don't know him.
@RoamingGnome When I start posting please participate either for or against my argument IDC. Just bring those sources with you!!!!!
Lol...I'm a non-innovative smart ass!!!....and did you check the notification history for the response alert? It's not like the Reddit system with the little letter prompt.
Yes, thank you. You reply fast. I have a tendency of hitting the edit button like 10 times after posting.
I wish I could be innovative =( I can use a non-innovative smart ass only if you are on my side!!
I got too much of that against me. One more and I might pop.
Kia Ora, @factoverfallacy!
Intriguing. Looking forward to seeing your stuff. Welcome!
Honest opinion, will I be welcome? Most places (Reddit) I just get gibberish like replies.
Looks like you’ve already got your welcome! Since you ask, though, the least I can do is give you the honest opinion you asked for. Seeing as how you haven’t actually posted any of your stuff yet, there’s only so much to go on. Offhand, I’d say it’s likely to come down to what you’re using for ‘facts,’ what kind of attitude you’re describing by ‘over,’ and what you’re taking to mean a ‘fallacy.’ One thing that gives me pause is your casually dismissing the replies you’ve had elsewhere so far as ‘gibberish.’
Time being scarce, I’ve hardly had any time to look over your participation in the subreddits /r/dogs, /r/DebateAChristian, /r/HillaryForPrison, /r/MensRights, /r/pitbulls, /r/progun, /r/rant, /r/The_Donald, and /r/TrueReddit. Wow, you’re a veterinarian? Right on. Brace yourself, word gets around about something like that. You’ll find a great number of folks around here do love their critters. It does look like you’ve had some contentious conversations, alright. Snapzu’s something else, though, than you’ve encountered at Reddit. Central to the philosophy here is a basic level of respect for the other users. If you’re tired of being battered about the face and neck by commenters over there, you can rest a bit more easily here. Due respect, though, means respect is due. Escalation’s got limits here. You set the tone, but mind how.
Wittgenstein was a person early in life, and a person later in life, and they couldn’t’ve been less alike. Younger Ludwig, in Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus days, insisted on a rigid, but brittle, analytical approach which was demanding enough for him to handle, but excruciating for people around him. Even exhausting. Decades later, he’d found his way through, out and around those strictures of meaning and understanding and achieved a grace in that whimsy and fun that would’ve been as nonsensical and gibberish to his younger self as we would find it wise and pragmatic. The Philosophical Investigations Ludwig sounds easier to know, but we are who we are when we are. It seems to me you’ve got so much respect for authorities that its affected the basic level of respect you can show to people that don’t happen to be your authorities, whether those authorities are your personal interpretation of abstract concepts or mainline interpretations of Christian scripture. Your ‘facts’ apparently include spectres and the judgments of a vengeful Christian god with a very regimented and dogmatic contempt for homosexuality, for instance.
Facts you derive from your version of plagiarized fairy tales aren’t ‘facts’ by anyone’s definition. Those are your opinions, your username notwithstanding. They’re also your opinions now, and may not be what you believe next term, or next year, or after your first car accident or after you’ve filed taxes or when you’ve had some losses. They’re, importantly, not facts to other people that’ve already been through those things. You’ve got your transient, ephemeral opinions mixed up with 'facts,' and that’s setting the stage for some drama to come.
Which raises also rather pressing questions about your working definition of ‘fallacy.’ Too-worshipful abeyance of sundry and various arbitrary and capricious authorities may be age-appropriate for you, and you should hear it from someone at this stage that questioning authorities isn’t heresy to the dogmas you’re treating as absolute truths, but...
... Read FullHow many words do you type per minute? I'm around a whopping 20 wpm. The message I am responding to would have taken me two hours to type out. I'll bet it took you 5 minutes. That's why my messages tend to not be very long.
I hunt and peck, but it's been so long now that I type well enough. It got better when I started pretending the next letter would fly right at my eye if I didn't punch it down first. My accuracy is terrible though. Once I've gone back and fixed things, my WPM's no better than most, I'll bet. You've got the right idea — keep to the point.
The older I've got,the worse my typing has become. I tend to hunt and peck,except playing Minecraft.
Hmm, I seem to not be getting notified when I get replies.
That is for sure. You completely took everything I said out of context or did a very quick skim to form an erroneous generalization.
Gibberish: unintelligible or meaningless speech or writing; nonsense.
Fact definition: a thing that is indisputably the case.
Opinion: a belief not based on absolute certainty or positive knowledge but on what seems true, valid, or probable to one's own mind; judgment
Bias: prejudice in favor of or against one thing, person, or group compared with another, usually in a way considered to be unfair.
An educated opinion requires the use of facts. An opinion is a judgment based on facts, an honest attempt to draw a reasonable conclusion from factual evidence. A bias is as I stated earlier is gibberish and has no place in an educated discussion. If you can't support your opinion with any type of data to form a conclusion it is just that. I don't mind a debate, however, when someone gives their n=1 opinion and provides no value to the audience, it clutters the internet with fallacies. The grade school old adage " it is not just the answer but how you arrived at the answer" holds true in any adult conversation.
So facts to support your opinion over a fallacy to support your bias!! Get it?
Did I ever say that I could never be wrong? However, unless you can cite your sources and support your opinions at some kind of university level,it is just that. A fallacy is defined as "a mistaken belief, especially one based on an unsound argument".
"I" am not wrong. I am smart but not innovative. I quote the innovators and experts. That is why I ask and try to understand why you think you know more than the evidence. FYI, I never cite just one source. If your answer is because uhhh uuhhh I feel or its just my opinion, well.....gibberish. I am very humble and respectful. I never dispute an expert unless I can back it up. That is just being stubborn.
I used to debate on the University level. Before I write anything, I normally debate both sides to catch my own unconscious biases. I actually find it humorous when I school someone in an argument that I am against (devils advocate). That is called a learning experience which I have had many. It is much better to get it wrong before it counts.
You must have skipped the about me,the conclusion and the gist of all my articles. My motto is "An opinion based on sound reasoning, logic, and empirical data is never really wrong; it’s debatable. An uneducated opinion formed by prejudice and bias is." So if someone gives me a credible argument, they get no flack from m...
... Read FullMay I suggest you've gotten so little out of people's responses because you've put so little into understanding them? I feel as though you've given my response very short shrift. Seems to me you're using 'gibberish' to mean any responses you can't fit within your doctrinaire understanding of your very personal selection of esoteric belief systems. Or, distressingly as likely, won't bother trying to fit.
Am I taking crazy pills or have you gotten 'facts' mixed up with 'axioms' and 'propositions' and 'inferences' and 'beliefs' all at once?
As much as I appreciate your taking time out of your day to explain four and seven letter words to me, because apparently I wouldn't've encountered these before and need them explained, it could be taken as pedantic condescension in casual conversation. Especially given that the working definitions you're apparently happy to teach seem as if they were done in particularly crude children's finger-paint handwriting.
There's a problem. Using the system you're describing, if someone else makes a statement, and it doesn't square with your secret homespun mix of dogma, their expressions become facts become opinions become bias become fallacy become gibberish. No wonder every response you get comes through as gibberish. To say nothing of what game you've decided we're all playing in your idea of an 'educated discussion' and 'adult conversation.' Because it looks like one where you correct people quite a lot.
Daresay so. Correct me if I'm wrong, and I'm always wrong.
Really? Because a lot of us are often wrong. It's all I can do to realize some, of the many, times I am wrong. So often is the average person wrong that it may be good to get ahead of this common human failing, and always play the fool. People you've thought were wrong, I'll bet, may've had some truth of their own you could've gained from, if you hadn't been so busy gainsaying them. There's always a chance that you were wrong, even if it wasn't in correctly applying some dogma or another, but because say the dogma's been long-refuted, or you'd seriously misjudged the nature of the conversation you were having, or how you might've benefited by it or even what your unfounded suppositions were. Could be, right? How red would your face be?
There are unkind ways to characterize this relationship. The question I am left with is what I'm paying you for, exactly.
No way, really? I had an inkling of this when /u/RoamingGnome expressed a human, personal sentiment and you 'corrected' him. Which is a bit like seeing a butterfly in the garden and trying, combatively, to solve it with Gaussian elimination.
Your short time in this universe is not a forensics competition with another school. Sometimes the answer is neither A nor B, but 1, 2, and 6. Sometimes the answer is because it snowed the night before and besides, haven't you always wanted to anyway?
... Read FullAgain as you claim you skimmed and in doing so you made an erroneous generalization. I will explain below as again your points (I still don't really know if you have one) is all over the place. I can't comprehend how asking how they arrived at that answer is a lack of understanding? Asking them to provide incite is the exact opposite not trying to understand.
You apparently needed them to be explained because I am using them correctly as shown.
Again your lack of understanding of the definitions you are using is comical. If you provide no evidence to support your opinion after being asked numerous times it is bias, prejudice and gibberish. That is a fact. For example, if you were to say Pit bulls are more aggressive than most breeds that is not an opinion but a false fact. And the use of the word Fact is very broad. For example, the National Center for Science education defines fact as: Fact: In science, an observation that has been repeatedly confirmed and for all practical purposes is accepted as “true.” To quote Stephen Jay Gould who is an American paleontologist, evolutionary biologist, and historian of science“In science, ‘fact’ can only mean ‘confirmed to such a degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional assent. " For an example it is considered a FACT that all humans have 46 chromosomes. However, that can change over time. People still debate the fact that the Earth is Round.
You really are taking the crazy pill. As per above I am using the word fact and other words just fine.
However, you keep using the word dogma out of context. [Dogma is a belief or set of beliefs that is accepted by the members of a group without being questioned or doubted] (a belief or set of beliefs that is accepted by the members of a group without being questioned or doubted) Dogma [http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/dogma] (http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/dogma) . [A doctrine or a corpus of doctrines relating to matters such as morality and faith, set forth in an authoritative manner by a religion] (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/dogma) Statement of facts are not a belief nor is an opinion based on verifiable data.
And if you want to state inference instead of an opinion to try and sound smart it is not working. An inference requires "a statement of fact to interpret, draw logical conclusions from given data, and project implications from the facts". So again I fail to see what you are trying to conclude. We draw inferences from factual observations. In hard sciences, many use the term theory which is defined is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and...
... Read FullWow you needed so much correction that Snapzu post ran out of room. Again your reading comprehension is horrid. I was giving him a compliment.
You state::
His comment here:
The definition of smart from various dictionaries: "done with intelligence or careful thought" , " Having or showing intelligence; bright", "clever, witty, or readily effective, as a speaker, speech, rejoinder"
So just like the rest of your "gibberish", yes that is what it is now, you are trying to call me out on a compliment. Although, smart is subjective, he was being modest and I called him out on it. People deserve recognition just like people deserve to be put in their place. Him using the dictionary makes him a genius compared to this.
Wow, this compliment makes me a horrible human being.
I should just keep quoting Neil Degrasse Tyson as he deals with this on a regular basis. FYI,even a world-renowned astrophysicist, along with many intelligent people don't get all positive comments. Thought,I would bring that up again to highlight your unsubstantiated opinion.
The infamous quote "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing". Ignorance has shown to do harm and if someone chooses to use their free speech to spew incorrect information, I will call them out on it. I might not be even close to as innovative or even smart as Degrasse but I will be sure to spread and...
... Read FullTell me you're not going to try to learn me some more four- and five-letter words. You are? Super.
Good job!
Way to go, Champ!
Yes, because word sense meanings are only allowed within 'contexts' you have personally issued formal, written approvals for two full business days in advance.
What are you: eight, nine?
Sure they do. That's swell, really.
Don't go to the trouble. You got that attitude across pretty early. For instance, you're still saying 'hey' in the lounge, and straight-away you can already tell this's going to be a thing with you. As it has been.
I get it. You're a bot. I'm solipsizing with RACTER here.
You get that a lot, do you? Trouble in social settings? Flak from people that, obviously, are jealous of your greatness, no doubt?
Not that every little thing is a pissing match with you or you're compensating for anything, mind you.
Happy I could help. You do seem to have some things you need to work out.
You know, I think I could probably have picked up on a few things earlier than I did.
You just give, and give and give. When is it time for you? For your needs? By this point, you've literally defined the word 'and' for me. Suggestion: if you find yourself needing to condescend so far as to define three- and four-letter words for your correspondent, you're doing it wrong.
Why should I? I'm sure you'll do a far better job pointing out problems than I ever could.
You’re not the only one, Mister.
You sound interesting..Welcome aboard.
Hopefully. I have joined many boards like this and have yet to get an intelligent reply. I hope this is different.
Most of my articles have at least 10 citations and comments another 15 but all I get is ad hominems. However, I clearly point out that you are calling the expert (citation) wrong not I with no actual proof.
Good to have you. Welcome!
Welcome to Snapzu! Enjoy!