Log In

Home
    - Create Journal
    - Update
    - Download

LiveJournal
    - News
    - Paid Accounts
    - Contributors

Customize
    - Customize Journal
    - Create Style
    - Edit Style

Find Users
    - Random!
    - By Region
    - By Interest
    - Search

Edit ...
    - Personal Info &
      Settings
    - Your Friends
    - Old Entries
    - Your Pictures
    - Your Password

Developer Area

Need Help?
    - Lost Password?
    - Freq. Asked
      Questions
    - Support Area



Maria the Lost ([info]mariagoner) wrote in [info]otf_wank,
@ 2007-04-12 19:48:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Troll in the Dungeon of DV! Troll!
Hysterically stupid troll Njyoder posts on stupid_free about why nobody should ever call if they witness domestic violence (or what they believe might be domestic violence.)

Let me tell you, internets, if there were any a man I'd go to for advice on what to do in a DV situation, it'd be him. Because he apparently knows all about the history of DV and I? I don't. ::snerk::

Oh, and this person isn't exactly a shining beacon of intelligence or compassion either.

(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)


[info]vzg
2007-04-13 06:04 pm UTC (link)
Aaand maybe I'm wrong, but don't most abuse victims like that tend to go so far as to lie to the police to keep from being taken from their abuser? I'd imagine there are many cases where the only way they'd have a chance of really getting out would be if law enforcement actually arrived while it was happening.

But, hey, I don't have statistics to prove it, so obviously this is all complete bullshit! Firsthand experience means nothing in the face of math, right?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]vzg
2007-04-13 06:05 pm UTC (link)
Okay, phrased that wrong in the second bit. Firsthand experience = that of those responding in stupid_free, not my own.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]goldberry
2007-04-13 06:25 pm UTC (link)
But surely njyoder has shown you the way - you don't have to actually have statistics, you just have to claim that they back you up!

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]vzg
2007-04-13 06:36 pm UTC (link)
And then demand thm from everyone else, right? And then I can proceed to act all high and mightly, like I won and stuff, while ridiculing them for not having information they never claimed to and expecting me to show them the information I did claim to have!

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]goldberry
2007-04-13 06:46 pm UTC (link)
Exactly. Damn, I wish I'd known about this style of debate before - I could have spent far less time working on my thesis!

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]khym_chanur
2007-04-13 09:04 pm UTC (link)
And then demand them from everyone else, right?

Well, according to him, if you're a hypocrite for asking him for sources or statistics, then he doesn't have to answer. Or if your motive for asking for sources is due to bitterness over how hard he PWNed you in your previous argument, he likewise has no obligation to cough up the sources.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

So tell me again what evidence I could present that would be considered valid...
[info]njyoder
2007-04-14 03:12 am UTC (link)
No, I just don't bother to look up statistics for complete morons in general.

It doesn't seem to matter, anyway. If I quoted statistics, then the idiots who think statistics are meaningless would chime in. If I don't cite statistics, then the people whining about me not citing them chime in.

I cited an example (anecdote) showing that what I said does happen, and then it was just denounced as just an anecdote, even though everyone else is offering anecdotes as proof.

I CAN'T WIN!

Please, oh wise one, in what situation could I possibly satisfy the peanut gallery? What evidence could I offer that wouldn't be mocked as stupid?

Oh I get it: what evidence and reasoning I present is IRRELEVANT--what matters is what I'm just plain wrong no matter what.

And just to emphasize the ridiculous double standard: what evidence would my opposition have to present to show that they're right? Oh yeah, NONE...they just have to claim that they're right.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: So tell me again what evidence I could present that would be considered valid... - [info]sepiamagpie, 2007-04-14 04:12 am UTC
Re: So tell me again what evidence I could present that would be considered valid... - [info]ecchaniz0r, 2007-04-14 12:03 pm UTC
Re: So tell me again what evidence I could present that would be considered valid... - [info]cookie_love, 2007-04-14 12:31 pm UTC
Re: So tell me again what evidence I could present that would be considered valid... - [info]mcity, 2007-04-14 01:40 pm UTC
Re: So tell me again what evidence I could present that would be considered valid... - [info]khym_chanur, 2007-04-14 05:57 pm UTC
Re: So tell me again what evidence I could present that would be considered valid... - [info]frequentmouse, 2007-04-14 07:53 pm UTC
Re: So tell me again what evidence I could present that would be considered valid... - [info]kittenmommy, 2007-04-16 04:18 pm UTC

[info]ichigatsu
2007-04-13 06:58 pm UTC (link)
The statistics support me in email!

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]eilan
2007-04-13 07:32 pm UTC (link)
PLAGIARIST!!1!!!!!11

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]puipui
2007-04-13 07:36 pm UTC (link)
It was a pastiche! An homage!

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]ichigatsu, 2007-04-13 07:48 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]evilsqueakers, 2007-04-14 03:55 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]ichigatsu, 2007-04-13 07:43 pm UTC

[info]caito
2007-04-13 10:01 pm UTC (link)
Like lurkers supporting with emails, them stats.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]caito
2007-04-13 10:02 pm UTC (link)
Like one who does not read other comments, that Caito.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]jat_sapphire, 2007-04-14 05:23 am UTC
Statistics are evul! Fuck science!
[info]njyoder
2007-04-14 03:06 am UTC (link)
Anecdotal evidence doesn't mean anything, you're right. I love how many people here are anti-science. Yes, your anti-scientific views make you look like a genius. Fuck studies that could possibly show you to be wrong.

Just so we're clear, since no one here has read such a study, studies include these things called statistics!

And maybe I'm wrong here, but sometimes the abused lie to the police even when they come over! Amazing!

But hey, lets not dare consult someone at a DV organization, an expert in this, to come and help her in private! The horror!

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Statistics are evul! Fuck science!
[info]vzg
2007-04-14 03:33 am UTC (link)
Yeah, and the police would never believe a woman was being beaten if she said she wasn't when they came over in the middle of it. I mean, if I saw a woman get beat to bleeding and bruised, I'd believe her the second she turned around and told me nothing happened! Amazing. Just like I believe people on the internet when they claim to know a lot about a subject and yet give no evidence whatsoever about any of their claims and then insist that everyone hates statistics because, hey, they'd maybe want to help someone out of the goodness of their heart! Obviously trying to help means you hate statistics. When you soothe a friend who's crying? Why, you're a statistics hater! Because I can tell you without any evidence to back it up that statistics SHOW that when you soothe that friend, she's actually fifty times as likely to kill herself!

And gee, I guess I should stop listening to all the other people who tell me that if I think I know someone's being abused, I should tell someone about it. Because there's only one domestic violence expert in the world, and they have STATISTICS.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Statistics are evul! Fuck science!
[info]njyoder
2007-04-14 07:34 am UTC (link)
I mean, if I saw a woman get beat to bleeding and bruised, I'd believe her the second she turned around and told me nothing happened!

Clearly, everything happens in real life just as you envision it. Please, show me your internet Ph.D. Mr. Expert.

Just like I believe people on the internet when they claim to know a lot about a subject and yet give no evidence whatsoever about any of their claims and then insist that everyone hates statistics because, hey, they'd maybe want to help someone out of the goodness of their heart!

Valuing first hand experience over scientific studies makes you anti-science. Did you forget what you said?

Why should we believe you again? You have presented no evidence, but we should believe YOU! Oh, double standards.

When you soothe a friend who's crying? Why, you're a statistics hater! Because I can tell you without any evidence to back it up that statistics SHOW that when you soothe that friend, she's actually fifty times as likely to kill herself!

Ridiculous false analogy.

And gee, I guess I should stop listening to all the other people who tell me that if I think I know someone's being abused, I should tell someone about it.

I never said that you shouldn't tell anyone. Reading what people write helps, instead of spewing random, ignorant tripe.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Statistics are evul! Fuck science! - [info]vzg, 2007-04-14 08:00 am UTC
Re: Statistics are evul! Fuck science! - [info]njyoder, 2007-04-14 08:11 am UTC
Re: Statistics are evul! Fuck science! - [info]vzg, 2007-04-14 08:21 am UTC
Re: Statistics are evul! Fuck science! - [info]njyoder, 2007-04-14 08:28 am UTC
Re: Statistics are evul! Fuck science! - [info]mistressrenet, 2007-04-15 01:53 am UTC
Re: Statistics are evul! Fuck science!
pooka
2007-04-14 03:34 am UTC (link)
I fucked Science once. He wasn't as passionate as Religion, but he knew where everything was and didn't go on and on with the whining about sin and guilt afterwards. Ah, Science. Sometimes I miss that cold, clinical bastard.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

*applause*
wolfie_thu
2007-04-14 06:23 am UTC (link)
I loled.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

Re: Statistics are evul! Fuck science!
[info]seiberwing
2007-04-14 07:10 pm UTC (link)
http://community.livejournal.com/anthropomor_fic/54234.html#cutid1

You were saying?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Statistics are evul! Fuck science! - pooka, 2007-04-14 07:19 pm UTC
Re: Statistics are evul! Fuck science! - [info]seiberwing, 2007-04-14 08:49 pm UTC
Reality is evul! Fuck facts!
bigi
2007-04-14 05:59 am UTC (link)
Anecdotal evidence doesn't mean anything, you're right. I love how many people here are anti-science. Yes, your anti-scientific views make you look like a genius. Fuck studies that could possibly show you to be wrong.

Ah, in that case, my dad, two uncles and cousin were all cops with the Chicago Police Department. Combined they have nearly 100 years of experience.

And they all think your advice is idiotic.

My ancedotal evidence > Yours.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Reality is evul! Fuck facts!
[info]njyoder
2007-04-14 06:05 am UTC (link)
You seem to have missed the point that anecdotal evidence is fallacious to use in an argument like this. I like this thing called 'science,' not 'random opinions of different people.'

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Reality is evul! Fuck facts! - [info]ecchaniz0r, 2007-04-14 12:02 pm UTC
Re: Reality is evul! Fuck facts! - pooka, 2007-04-14 07:23 pm UTC
Re: Statistics are evul! Fuck science!
[info]eilan
2007-04-14 07:26 am UTC (link)
Yes, we all hate science. Because, you know, we believe that you have to cite your sources even if you don't quote and just reference them. That's so un-scientific!

Okaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay!

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Statistics are evul! Fuck science!
[info]njyoder
2007-04-14 07:29 am UTC (link)
This thread has nothing to do with citing sources. It has to do with some idiot denying that the utility of statistics. But hey, you don't read comments, so what do you care?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Statistics are evul! Fuck science! - [info]eilan, 2007-04-14 07:51 am UTC
Re: Statistics are evul! Fuck science! - [info]ecchaniz0r, 2007-04-14 12:02 pm UTC
Oh, sweetie!
[info]lurker32
2007-04-14 06:39 pm UTC (link)
It's really okay if you don't give all your comments sarcastic subject lines. We all just assume that you're taking the preceding remarks as far out of context as you can drag them anyway. There's no need to make sure we get it.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Oh, sweetie!
[info]njyoder
2007-04-14 06:50 pm UTC (link)
When I have taken anything out of context? The "please give me sources" bullshit is pretty clear. How the other guy's "statistics and individual personal experience are equally valid" bullshit?

And BY THE WAY, I just got finished commenting to someone in another post who insisted that those *obviously sarcastic* remarks weren't actually sarcasm and that I was backpedaling. So really, I'm not going to assume the slightest bit of intelligence here--everything needs to be made blindingly obvious.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

Re: Statistics are evul! Fuck science!
[info]mistressrenet
2007-04-15 02:13 am UTC (link)
Okay, FINE, I give in.

Jeri Ryan is kind of hot.

Dammit.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

(Read comments) -

 
   
Privacy Policy - COPPA
Legal Disclaimer - Site Map