Can someone at least back me up that Kingpoleon is the worst?

[Famous Mortimer]

That's all I ask.

[Torie]

You need to chill is what you need to do, and well, no, as to what you ask. Granted the worst of the posters have been banned, or just left. Anyway, most posters here are young and learning to think and be mature. Lift them up, don't put them down, is my motto.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

No.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

As bad as something may seem, just remember it can always be worse. When it comes to Atlasian posters, it has definately been worse.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Famous Mortimer really isn't in a position to be calling anyone the worst:

It's unpopular to say but I really do believe there are a lot of misguided women who would allow themselves to get "raped" rather than just say "no" even though saying "no" would likely stop many of the "rapists" Because if they said "no" and the guy did stop, then they wouldn't be able to complain about the omnipresent "rape culture"

What the f**k?

I know it seems weird but my friends post articles on Facebook all the time, I see comments on Jezebel and other websites.

At first I thought they were poorly constructed parodies but everyone appears to be taking them at face value. If anyone is even mildly critical, they are shouted down.

The story is always the same: Girl in college. Guy asks her out. She doesn't want to but agrees out of pity. She allows herself to get drunk. She agrees to go back to his place. She makes out with him even though she doesn't want to, again out of pity. They have sex. She doesn't say "no" but she either doesn't move or she says something like "slow down" or "please wear a condom" It's rape. After the rape, she may agree to hang out with him several more times, again apparently out of pity. She may even get "raped" a couple more times. The writer will then make clear that the worst part is this person doesn't even know he's a rapist! But they are!

I've seen variations on that story so many times over the past couple years.

Also, just to be clear, nothing like that has ever happened to me. I always wait for enthusiastic consent and use a safe word even when I'm not doing anything particularly kinky, just because I'm terrified of these chicks being out there.

Those groups definitely exist but I still do think there are women who seek out the attention that being "raped" brings. I once knew in a girl, IRL, who claimed her long term boyfriend raped her because he got her to go along with sex even though she was sick and didn't feel like it. She admitted she didn't say "no" she just acquiesced to having sex with the guy she lived with and shared a bed with. She kept going out with the guy for 2 years after that also. Of course, after she told that story, everyone in the room told her what a brave, beautiful survivor she was. That's why some women try to read rape into all their past sexual encounters, the attention, it's like Munchhausen syndrome.

Of course, I don't think things like this constitute a majority of rape accusations, but they do exist. People practically brag about their rapes the way people used to brag about their bad childhoods to show how deep and interesting they are.

If a girl agrees to go on a date with you and agrees to go back to your place after that date, that would seem to be fairly clear implied consent to most people. If that's not the case, the girl needs to give a clear "no" to cancel out the mixed messages.

"Do you want to come up to my place for a drink?" = "do you want to have sex?"

Everyone knows that because it's been repeated in every piece of media ever.

Anyone who doesn't know that is either a vegetable or being disingenuous.

Obviously if you agree to a drink and say "NO" you mean "NO"

but if you agree to a drink and you don't say anything, you will come off as being coy, and that's probably your intention unless you're mentally ill or an idiot.

[Famous Mortimer]

At least I defended my positions. There's lots of terrible libertarians here who I disagree with but I don't call them out because they at least attempt to explain their rationale. Kingpoleon just posts ridiculous election "what if?"s with no basis in reality. "What if Bill de Blasio was Sanders running mate on an independent ticket?"

[YaBoyNY]

At least I defended my positions. There's lots of terrible libertarians here who I disagree with but I don't call them out because they at least attempt to explain their rationale. Kingpoleon just posts ridiculous election "what if?"s with no basis in reality. "What if Bill de Blasio was Sanders running mate on an independent ticket?"

Oh wow, the horror.

Somebody using an election forum to discuss electoral what-ifs.

The absolute horror. This is just atrocious!

[Joe Republic]

At least I defended my positions.

In this case, that really doesn't help you.

[Mr. Smith]

At least I defended my positions. There's lots of terrible libertarians here who I disagree with but I don't call them out because they at least attempt to explain their rationale. Kingpoleon just posts ridiculous election "what if?"s with no basis in reality. "What if Bill de Blasio was Sanders running mate on an independent ticket?"

So uh if I got this straight:

What-ifs clearly meant to let off steam are "the worst"

Not rape apologism, general bigotry, hackery, tone-trolling, condescension, or general Nixony.

But What-ifs....

That's some odd priorities you got there.

[Leinad]

His analysis won't get him hired by Nate Silver, but I can think of several posters more annoying. If he, or anyone else, gets stuff wrong: teach them, don't bash them. If you're as smart as you seem to think you are, then you'll turn a subjectively annoying poster into a good one, instead of chasing someone away.

Famous Mortimer, you seem to represent some of the worst of the internet: snobbery and putting down rape victims as fakers. The snobbery part is prevalent too often, and it's not noticed as much as it should be. I'm talking about calling people "the worst" instead of trying to help them, or even ignoring them. Where you feel that you're so important and the other person (Kingpoleon, in this case) is so bad that everyone needs to hear your opinion of how bad this person is. The putting down of rape victims is simply awful. Cut that out, please. I guess the silver lining is that, to be careful, you're really sure about asking for consent--but the motives are all wrong. Assuming that a person, when they talk about a terrible thing that happened to them, is lying just to get attention is, well, a very idiotic position to take.

Now, that's as far as you should go with the critique. I didn't make sweeping accusations about you (I said you seem to represent the internet's worst)--why? Because you're a person, and I don't know you. All that I did was tell you what you're doing wrong and why it's wrong--and now I'm telling you how, in my opinion, to get better. All you're doing is attacking the who of Kingpoleon--which is a line you shouldn't cross on the internet.

Let's keep it civil, everyone. Critique with the intent of making someone a better poster, yes, but never insult with no apparent intent except making someone feel bad.

I guess you didn't ask for my advice, but I gave it. Take it with a grain of salt if you like. But cut out the rape defence, please.

[Simfan34]

Constructive criticism? Refraining from mockery? A welcoming environment? You really are new!

[SWE]

I don't know who Kingpoleon is, but I will not back you up on your claim that there are worse posters than you, no.

[RFayette]

Considering that Nate Silver hired Harry Enten, I wouldn't consider his staff the paragon of the sharpest political analysts.

[Leinad]

Constructive criticism? Refraining from mockery? A welcoming environment? You really are new!

I guess so, but it's more a matter of me being a naive idealist than being new. I'll probably still aim for a utopia of civil discourse even after 10 years on the forum, even though I know it will never happen.

You can have problems with people, but posting a thread that does literally nothing to help anyone is stupid.

Considering that Nate Silver hired Harry Enten, I wouldn't consider his staff the paragon of the sharpest political analysts.

First thing that came into my head. I was agreeing that some of Kingpoleon's analysis is a bit shaky, but it doesn't make him annoying. I think that if he continues posting and following politics he'll get a lot better. He certainly has an interest, which is step 1, and this website (and even the forum) can help him progress in his posting quality--but not if he's chased off.

[Türkisblau]

You've exhibited several symptoms of being "The Worst" so I don't think you should be throwing that accusation around.

[Negusa Nagast 🚀]

No, Cory is the worst.

[Badger]

You've exhibited several symptoms of being "The Worst" so I don't think you should be throwing that accusation around.