Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
The Ricochet I Love
As an official Ricochet Moderator,™ some days I despair for the grand experiment in civil, right-wing community building that is Ricochet. So much of my energy on the site is spent dealing with sniping and griping that I start to wonder if anyone actually wants to have a conversation.
Too many times it feels like members are here to repeat the same arguments like a Groundhog Day from Hell, burn acres of strawmen, gloat over the fellow Ricochetti they consider their enemies, and bring up every less-than-complimentary thing anyone has ever said to them as justification for their own bad behavior, like a half of a couple that wants a divorce but wants to force the other party to be the one who actually files. Two things have happened in the last few days though that have rekindled hope that this community can actually work as intended.
The first is so simple it should hardly need to be mentioned. Brian Watt created a post on “ecosexuality.” iWe put up a disagreeing post that mentioned that it was in reaction to Brian’s. iWe didn’t hijack the thread to make himself the center of conversation; Brian didn’t complain about being embarrassed by having a fellow member disagree with him. It’s a beautiful model of how Ricochet as a good faith conversation should work.
The second is also a wonderful example of mature behavior. In GrannyDude’s recent post “The Mystery of Male Armies: Redux,” there was a flap over language. One party attempted to make a joke which due to the nature of text fell flat, and the recipient felt offended. The recipient admitted to hurt feelings and requested an apology, which was then given and accepted. Neither party went off-thread to complain about “that insulting jerk” or “that humorless scold.” Neither used knowledge of the other’s personal life to exacerbate the fight or poison the possibility of reconciliation. Neither appear to be holding a grudge that will be remembered for months or years. The thread has returned to being a pleasant conversation.
I realize that not every problem can be solved so easily, that we all have sore spots and wounds from our lives in general and previous conversations on Ricochet. I know that we all have those positions on which no compromise is able to be made. But civility can exist among adults who work to create it, and I’m happy that we still have many of those people at Ricochet.
Published in General
Not before mine.
As friends-who’ve-only-met-in-an-online-forum go, I was pretty good friends with Kenneth. That said, it because painfully obvious to me that he could never quite grasp that his flights of passion weren’t exempt from the CoC.
He treated others I knew horribly, too, in a way they didn’t deserve.
We three are within one month of each other in 2012. I hope that doesn’t mean anything.
As a Rico old-timer, I remember Kenneth well.
Bethany as a pro Trump foil to balance Jon is pure fantasy, you have two editors that are both anti-Trump. Same with the notion that Mad Dogs is a balanced podcast, they’re both anti-Trump. If you’re really including those two as examples of how balanced you are, it just re-enforces many of our opinions on how out of touch you are. This has mostly been a good exchange and I don’t want it to go negative, but come on…
Don’t pee on my leg and tell me it’s raining.
Is Mad Dogs balanced by Harvard Lunch Club? Those guys are both pro-Trump.
I like both podcasts.
You’re right about Mad Dogs. My mistake. And I didn’t say Bethany was a pro-Trump foil — I said she supports Trump when she agrees with him. Like most people. So you got me on one and half of my dozen or so examples.
Yes, and… I am old enough to remember when the Obama team fully weaponized the executive branch to control state and local government. See the IRS targeting of Tea Party organizations, breaking their momentum in time for 2012. See the DOJ “consent” decrees imposing the left’s politics on local communities and their law enforcement organizations. See the EPA and Corps of Engineers declaring every seasonal puddle and slightest ravine covered under navigable waters regulations. Just for starters.
If you like your mayor, you can keep your mayor, but she’ll do as she’s told by a federal bureaucrat, or else. While Pres Trump is trying to reverse these intrusions, federal judges (leftist permanent government operatives) are fighting him every step of the way. The moment President Trump loses legislative majorities, or the moment he is out of office, the left will take two steps forward for the one step they were set back by the 2016 election.
Living with that reality raises the stakes and passions around our national government.
I’ve kept silent, but this comment was uncalled for, @curtnorth. Too many of the disgruntled group keep looking for gotcha moments and I, for one, am tired of them. To call out someone because he or she is not precisely right is just plain silly and boring. And your comment is disgusting about peeing. Can we all act like grownups, assume people are here in the best interests of the site, not accuse each other at every little point that you think is an offense, and move on? For example, Curt, you could have said, ” I disagree with your assessment, particularly since Mad Dogs are both anti-Trump. And we disagree regarding Bethany.” FWIW, I think @blueyeti‘s assessment of Bethany and Jon are accurate.
I’m not asking people to become apathetic. I’m not asking anything except civility. I would just like people to look around and decide if Ricochet really needs the 4,834th post about Donald Trump that will contain no new information, arguments, or participants, and just get everyone mad at each other. Again.
Did he ever tell you what the frequency was?
I’m beginning to think I should have used a pen name as the years have gone by. I joined early in 2010 and didn’t give it a second thought. Is it too late to change names???
One illustrious member does it whenever he puts on a new shirt :)
What is a HW?
Happy Warriors. The Pro-Trump user group on Ricochet.
Ha! No, but he told me to avoid bullfighting at all costs.
Nice post, Amy: thanks.
Simply, it’s nice to be here. Best to you all.
Yes, I’m a lurker.
I’m positive you didn’t mean it this way, but when read this can come off as prejudging other members and dismissing them without actually evaluating what they have said. In my mind this is one of the primary reasons things went south and have not returned as far as I would like. I try (though I obviously fail often) to assume the best motive on the part of others when they write something here. If I think the statement can’t possibly be as bad as it looks then I’ll ask. I find questions to be much more clarifying than accusations and dismissals.
If you look back at my comments, I think we’ve been having a pretty productive discussion, I said that myself in this thread and I also I let my fellow HW’s know that they ought to read this comments thread, that the mods were being very open and it was a good back and forth. I’m hardly “calling someone out” for not being precisely right, the examples he gave weren’t really true, as he even admitted. It’s all part of a healthy debate, I thought.
The pee phrase is a very old and well used funny analogy here in the mid-west, worthy of a chuckle, not “disgust”.
I came to Ricochet expecting to write and respond to political and national security posts, mostly. I have found more satisfaction in more personal posts, mainly. It is possible, and important, to write researched and well-argued new posts on national politics. The best constructed posts might even help influence local to national debate. Sometimes that might be accomplished with a sharp turn of phrase, and sometimes with sweet reason. In seeking one or both, I keep coming back to:
Trey Gowdy offers advice on effective persuasion early in this address:
And then it is worth going back to the R> FAQs on writing from time to time, or any other essay writing guide.
Perhaps part of the answer is taking lengthy comments or serial comments as a cue to pull the argument into a new OP. I found this productive in a substantive dispute over alleged predictive or law-like patterns in elections.
I started with comments on a @garyrobbins post. Comments were too short to lay out my argument. So I started writing a post. Then I realized I actually needed to go back to the relevant literature. Eventually I wrote Any Republican Would Have Won in 2016? It Ain’t Necessarily So.
Actually, that was not my original title. Look at the URL for the original. It was Gary who DMed me to say the post was not getting the attention it deserved, and suggested I edit the title to make it more provocative. That worked.
He and I will seldom agree on politics, but this was a constructive, while pointed, exchange of arguments in two OPs.
whole analogy so funny but this. Thanks.
I think it’s more earthy home-spin wisdom than disgusting.
It’s a fairly well-known and commonly used metaphor for asking someone to stop saying things the listener does not believe to be true.
Interesting. While my Never Democrat convictions generally overwhelm my Trump Skepticism ( Other than trade, I like most of the policies, but find the man to be of low character and of annoying personality ), I tend think most of the things said by those opposed to Trump to be true. I just think the general evil of the Democrats & their proposed policies is enough to support Trump. As such I find most of the pro Trump posts to be annoying and most of the anti Trump posts to be interesting,
Based on my own biases, I perceive member posts and comments on Ricochet to be overwhelmingly Pro Trump, and observe much ridicule and vindictive aimed at the Anti Trump people.
I suspect most Anti Trump people perceive the site to be overwhelmingly Pro Trump. And I suspect most Pro Trump people perceive the site to be overwhelmingly Anti Trump.
I am really enjoying the posts that don’t refer to Trump one way or another — there are lots of things to discuss and argue about that don’t involve Trump, or involve Trump only peripherally.
Eh, KP, I’ve had a member who treats writing posts on the same contentious topic repeatedly as a special treat describe himself to me as a “brawler”.
People can come to Riochet spoiling for a fight as long as they keep it civil. Of course, what counts as “spoiling for a fight” is somewhat in the eye of the beholder. One man’s pleasantly stimulating forensics may be another man’s needless bickering with normal folks — not everyone finds debate pleasant, after all. What strikes some as just homespun humor strikes others as belittling. Sometimes one guy’s trenchant phrase is another guy’s “fighting words”. And so on. So what to do about it?
Presuming the best motives of others is great when you have the energy to do so, but not everyone does 24/7. That’s fine, and there are several non-problematic ways of handling that, including ignoring certain OPs and comments, or logging off the site for a bit if it’s getting you unpleasantly exercised.
Not having the energy to presume good faith, but having plenty of energy to call out supposed bad faith tends to be one of the more problematic ways of handling it, though. And if someone’s frequent experience of logging onto Ricochet were hard-to-contain wrath at all these other annoying users spoiling for a fight, the guy most spoiling for a fight here might be most easily viewed in a mirror.
Let him or her who has ears to hear listen! I’ve been that member staring at myself. Shut the ‘puter, go fold some laundry, make dinner or read a good book instead.
Yes to the 10th, at least. It is the essence of any morality-laced, polarizing issue. By definition. Running out of cliches. To the OP…
My first negative experience with Ricochet went back to when it was associated with (mumble) as the front end (or was it the back end?). I attempted to cross swords with One With Whom No Disagreement was tolerated, was unjustly censored, and I walked away for a while. I think that the impetus to have another look was the auto renewal of my membership… I have since found R to be one of only two blogs worth the time. Actually, my only quibble is that it is too much like high school in that there are Popular Kids(tm) and the rest of us. Maybe that’s just Real Life(tm).
So sail on…
I’ve had to do that. It’s been a while, but before I had steady access to antidepressants, there were simply days when I couldn’t log in. There would be some post that would reduce me to tears or deranged raving, and I just had to walk away. There’s no shame in it; it’s not a matter of being too weak or emotional. Rationality and civility are just not the default state of human kind (due to original sin and/or evolutionary heritage), and it takes a certain amount of energy to be so. Some days one just doesn’t have the energy.
This is why I created and use #MRGA: Mke Ricochet Great Again.
I bestow it upon this most, even though you always disagree with me.
#MRGA!
Now, I call upon the PTB to implement hashtags and emojis.
Well, blogs and platforms are part of the attention economy, and arguably so’s the social life of high school. There are different cliques here, that’s true, but fortunately not just one. As might be expected, power users are more likely to get noticed.