Re: oh, it's called a sweeping generalization retard ...

On 7/31/2026 3:16 PM, Creon wrote:
> At Fri, 31 Jul 2026 10:14:40 -0700, Dude <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> On 7/31/2026 1:53 AM, dart200 wrote:
>>> On 7/30/26 9:25 PM, Creon wrote:
>>>> At Thu, 30 Jul 2026 20:43:53 -0700, Dude <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 7/30/2026 6:53 PM, dart200 wrote:
>>>>>> On 7/30/26 6:44 PM, Creon wrote:
>>>>>>> At Thu, 30 Jul 2026 19:42:44 -0400, Noah Sombrero <[email protected]>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, 30 Jul 2026 21:47:37 +0000, Creon <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> At Thu, 30 Jul 2026 14:02:12 -0700, Dude <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Post your opinion here:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Fine, I shall:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I think there is too much "baseline fallacy" in the economics
>>>>>>>>> discussion.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And, I think the idea that the wealthy buy politicians is
>>>>>>>>> a bit trite.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And the reason certain ideas become trite is...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> $ dict trite
>>>>>>> 2 definitions found
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>    From The Collaborative International Dictionary of English v.0.48
>>>>>>> [gcide]:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>      Trite \Trite\ (tr[imac]t), a. [L. tritus, p. p. of terere to
>>>>>>>         rub, to wear out; probably akin to E. throw. See {Throw}, and
>>>>>>>         cf. {Contrite}, {Detriment}, {Tribulation}, {Try}.]
>>>>>>>         Worn out; common; used until so common as to have lost
>>>>>>>         novelty and interest; hackneyed; stale; as, a trite remark; a
>>>>>>>         trite subject. -- {Trite"ly}, adv. -- {Trite"ness}, n.
>>>>>>>         [1913 Webster]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>    From WordNet (r) 3.0 (2006) [wn]:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>      trite
>>>>>>>          adj 1: repeated too often; overfamiliar through overuse;
>>>>>>>                 "bromidic sermons"; "his remarks were trite and
>>>>>>>                 commonplace"; "hackneyed phrases"; "a stock answer";
>>>>>>>                 "repeating threadbare jokes"; "parroting some timeworn
>>>>>>>                 axiom"; "the trite metaphor `hard as nails'" [syn:
>>>>>>>                 {banal}, {commonplace}, {hackneyed}, {old-hat},
>>>>>>>                 {shopworn}, {stock(a)}, {threadbare}, {timeworn},
>>>>>>>                 {tired}, {trite}, {well-worn}]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ...and have I introduced you to the "panopticon" theory of media
>>>>>>> dynamics?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Media doesn't report what everyone thinks, it reports what it wants
>>>>>>> everyone to think everyone thinks.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Political corruption is a problem, but implying that _all_
>>>>>>> wealthy people are part of that is...a baseline fallacy.
>>>>>> seriously this group is literally just noah + a bunch of retarded cons
>>>>>> with their heads stuck up their butts, eh???
>>>>>>
>>>>>> it's statistically provable that public opinion does _not_ influence
>>>>>> federal policy, and that only the opinion of the wealthy matters in us
>>>>>> federal policy. they do this by surveying groups of people, segmenting
>>>>>> them by wealth class, and comparing that to the result of public
>>>>>> policy.
>>>>>> it's not a hard analysis.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> in order to claim the /baserate/ fallacy u need some stats to back that
>>>>>> up, claiming it out of the blue is just a _bear_ assertion
>>>>>>
>>>>> That should be a wrap!
>>>>
>>>> Yes.  Specifically, fishrap.
>>>>
>>>> (It's used to attract the _bear_s, I guess?)
>>>>
>>>> dart200 is confused, that's not what the baseline fallacy
>>>> is.  The baseline fallacy is assuming "all" for "many", because
>>>> the large majority of a group form a "baseline" that is then
>>>> used to pigeonhole the whole group.
>>>
>>> nigga are you going to respond with anything useful?
>>>
>> The base line on this board is that the claim you are referring to is
>> entirely false and fabricated, originating from a mashup of internet
>> rumors and memes made up by informants which have all been refuted and
>> found to be spurious, crude racist and biased - on this very board!
>>
>> Don't make us go back there, Nick. It won't be easy on your ego. You
>> came here to get enlightened.
>>
>> You came to a bowling alley. Now You're our Bitch.
>>   >
>>   >
>>>    > or just keep proving wealth turns _all_ into retarded children???
>>>    >
>>>    > #god
>>>
>>> cause that's just a true generalization ... not a fallacy
>>>
>>> and i believe we'll prove it true when build transparent systems
>>>
>>>    > 🖕🤣🖕
>>>    >
>>>    > #god
>>>
>> The base rate fallacy (often called a baseline fallacy) is a thinking
>> error where you ignore general statistical facts (the "base rate") and
>> focus only on small, specific details or a single story
>>>>
>>>> But I'm sure Nick knew all that.  That's what I like about him:
>>>> his attention to detail.
>>>>
>>>>>>>>> My biz partner has met with the FCC, along
>>>>>>>>> with other representatives from regional ISPs that he
>>>>>>>>> picked up along the way.  Can't afford lobbiests?  Lobby yourself.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Someday I'll have to tell you our "coopetition" story.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Note: The opinions expressed by informants are their own and do not
>>>>>>>>>> necessarily represent the views of all Usenet board subscribers.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
> 
> I would really rather not see the mental midget quoted
> if he's going to throw tantrums.
> 
> Otherwise, it will be off to the cornfield for you, too. ;)
> 
Nick and Noah are easily triggered. Some people are highly susceptible 
to suggestion. YMMV.