Can you show me on the therapist’s little doll where I inappropriately touched you? What’s this all about? This is now the second time you were upset with me - both inexplicable.
In the General/Chat forum, on a thread titled Q ~ Trust Trump's Plan ~ 08/26/2023 Vol.471, Q Day 2129, stylin19a wrote: Pullin stuff out of thin air again, I see. Your premise sux. I'm not an anon and never have been.
remember this?
https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/4170762/posts?page=1581#1581
you:
ransomnote: After your abusive posts to me (here and here), I don't want you to ping me unless it's necessary thread business.
one of my responses to you.
gaslighting becomes you.
Stick all that in your ear.
yet here, https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/4173762/posts
you go on another thread, and imo, get your hat handed to you and you flounce away with this:
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/4173762/posts?page=61#61
To: Red6
Go pound sand and leave me alone.
61 posted on 8/12/2023, 1:40:31 AM by ransomnote (IN GOD WE TRUST)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies | Report Abuse]
That's way different than "stick all that in your ear"?
thread business...your tiring hypocrisy.
Go ahead - justify, rationalize, and do whatever voodoo that you do so well.
you\we probably should take this hypocrisy to festival.
To not do so, would be hypocritical.The above is a response to my post here. I re-posted Grey_whiskers excellent list of Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation here.
I would say, referencing Grey_whiskers handy list, that the above response in the box primarily employs #17 with hopes of employing #18.17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can ‘argue’ with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.
18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can’t do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how ‘sensitive they are to criticism.’ransomnote: As to the tactic of "Look! Squirrel!" charge of hypocrisy - I told someone trolling me I was not reading their posts, to leave me alone, or to 'go pound sand' a total of 5 times on that thread.
This, of course, has nothing to do with the topic of my original post - so I would say there may be a #26 having to do with 'non responsive' posts. It's a reply giving an unrelated answer or appearing to answer a question no one asked. Yes it's changing the subject, but it is presented in a way that suggests it's a direct response when in fact it's just misdirection, in this case even claiming the moral high ground by directing me to prove I'm not a hypocrit by posting my reply in Festival. Hmmmm...I see attempts at moral high ground often in the forum - we may need a 27th rule.
On of the tasks on my thread 'to do' list is to link FReeQs content about troll tactics to the FAQ at the start of each thread. *writes it down*