Actually, I’ve used the “Yawn” post before... but it was more of a response to the article posted than to the poster.
3... 2 ... 1... until mnehrling finds some way to blow my posts out of the water :0)
Seriously, good point about paranoia, well made.
I doubt that DT as written could be successfully used on this forum. We DO get shills (classic builders of fake consensus), but I believe this Forum is well armored against them. This is because FReepers instinctively refer to an external touchstone on most issues (e.g the Constitution, the Bible, scientific papers, sourced links and so on).
But we do get dishonest techniques - ad hominem attacks, and prior constraint of debate. They are always obvious (and annoying) when used - no secret mind techniques, no possible cause for paranoia.
With respect however, I can’t agree that it could ever be a good idea to use manufactured ‘consensus’ to get things going the way one wants. Doing this must surely pose a moral hazard?
By which I mean: it’s not bad just because it’s dishonest, but also because in the end you would end up relying on slippery group dynamics rather than having and holding good ideas.
Better to make sure one’s arguments are good, one’s position is sound: train yourself to stand your ground and repeat the truth. This has got to be better strategy.
(Disclaimer: I have no experience in moving groups either with truth or trickery)
It might be a valid question at an event how-ever to come right out and ask...”Are we working towards a goal you and your group have predetirmined is correct...I thought we were here to simply air our grievances and hear your proposals about the sewer line at “anyplace” road?