 |
|
I asked GROK to give a reasoned response to your response
Posted on: April 23, 2025 at 12:57:53 CT
JeffB MU
Posts:
72394
Member For:
21.45 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
to its roast. The reply (Must scroll down):
https://x.com/i/grok?conversation=1915102467454308508
From an objective standpoint, JG MU’s response to the roast is a mix of defensiveness and a claim to have previously addressed criticisms, but it lacks specifics that would make it easy to verify or engage with constructively. Let’s break it down:
JG asserts they’ve “posted many many many many many times” about their conservative positions, claiming to have listed “more than 10 things.” The emphatic repetition suggests frustration, likely from feeling misunderstood or ignored. However, without citing specific posts or summarizing those positions here, the claim is hard to substantiate. On a forum like TigerBoard, where threads can pile up fast, expecting others to dig through post history for these lists is unrealistic. If JG wants to shut down the critique that they dodge questions about their conservatism (as MIZ45 challenged on 8/11/23), they’d be better served by briefly restating a few key points or linking to a past post. Without that, it sounds like bluster, even if true.
The second part—“NO ONE has ever come up with a reasoned response to what I am liberal about”—is a bolder claim. It implies JG has laid out liberal positions clearly and that opponents have failed to engage thoughtfully. Again, without examples, it’s tough to evaluate. The Politics Board is a rough-and-tumble place; reasoned debate often gets buried under snark or insults (e.g., Achmed’s “pathological liar” jab or DHighlander’s toilet quip). If JG has posted nuanced liberal views, they might be drowned out by the board’s combative vibe or their own fiery style, which can come off as more confrontational than inviting. Still, claiming no one has ever responded reasonably is a stretch—hyperbole that weakens their case. It’s possible some responses were dismissed as unreasonable because they didn’t align with JG’s perspective.
Objectively, JG’s response shows they feel strongly that they’ve been clear about their views and unfairly targeted. But the lack of concrete references or examples makes it hard for others to take the claim at face value.
The roast painted JG as someone who swings hard but doesn’t always connect; this response reinforces that by leaning on vague assertions rather than landing a clear counterpunch. If JG wants to flip the script, they could try a post that calmly lists, say, three conservative and three liberal positions they hold, then invite discussion. That’d be tougher to brush off.
As for the board’s dynamics, both sides seem more interested in dunking than debating. JG’s not wrong that reasoned responses can be scarce, but their own approach—described in the roast as loud and repetitive—might not be helping. It’s a classic forum trap: everyone’s shouting, nobody’s listening.
Edited by JeffB at 13:58:44 on 04/23/25
https://x.com/i/grok?conversation=1915102467454308508
From an objective standpoint, JG MU’s response to the roast is a mix of defensiveness and a claim to have previously addressed criticisms, but it lacks specifics that would make it easy to verify or engage with constructively. Let’s break it down:
JG asserts they’ve “posted many many many many many times” about their conservative positions, claiming to have listed “more than 10 things.” The emphatic repetition suggests frustration, likely from feeling misunderstood or ignored. However, without citing specific posts or summarizing those positions here, the claim is hard to substantiate. On a forum like TigerBoard, where threads can pile up fast, expecting others to dig through post history for these lists is unrealistic. If JG wants to shut down the critique that they dodge questions about their conservatism (as MIZ45 challenged on 8/11/23), they’d be better served by briefly restating a few key points or linking to a past post. Without that, it sounds like bluster, even if true.
The second part—“NO ONE has ever come up with a reasoned response to what I am liberal about”—is a bolder claim. It implies JG has laid out liberal positions clearly and that opponents have failed to engage thoughtfully. Again, without examples, it’s tough to evaluate. The Politics Board is a rough-and-tumble place; reasoned debate often gets buried under snark or insults (e.g., Achmed’s “pathological liar” jab or DHighlander’s toilet quip). If JG has posted nuanced liberal views, they might be drowned out by the board’s combative vibe or their own fiery style, which can come off as more confrontational than inviting. Still, claiming no one has ever responded reasonably is a stretch—hyperbole that weakens their case. It’s possible some responses were dismissed as unreasonable because they didn’t align with JG’s perspective.
Objectively, JG’s response shows they feel strongly that they’ve been clear about their views and unfairly targeted. But the lack of concrete references or examples makes it hard for others to take the claim at face value.
The roast painted JG as someone who swings hard but doesn’t always connect; this response reinforces that by leaning on vague assertions rather than landing a clear counterpunch. If JG wants to flip the script, they could try a post that calmly lists, say, three conservative and three liberal positions they hold, then invite discussion. That’d be tougher to brush off.
As for the board’s dynamics, both sides seem more interested in dunking than debating. JG’s not wrong that reasoned responses can be scarce, but their own approach—described in the roast as loud and repetitive—might not be helping. It’s a classic forum trap: everyone’s shouting, nobody’s listening.
Edited by JeffB at 13:58:44 on 04/23/25
Please explain why this message is being reported.
MESSAGE THREAD
I asked GROK to give a reasoned response to your response - JeffB MU - 4/23 12:57:53