A Study in Trolls: Updated

Home Forums Decaffeinated Coffee Controversial Topics A Study in Trolls: Updated

Viewing 50 posts - 51 through 100 (of 188 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1734034

    klugeryid
    Participant

    I still don’t see any brilliance in it.
    But now I have no hope that you’ll be able to enlighten me, so I’m done for this

    #1734078

    ubiquitin
    Participant

    KY
    “I still don’t see any brilliance in it.”

    Like I said (twice, three times? )
    “Of course If you don’t like it that is fine too”
    It will be ok, don’t worry about it.

    Joseph
    “ubiq: Correct me if I’m not following your line of thought/reasoning correctly. You’ve taken the following positions: 1. Most Chareidi men would vote against women’s suffrage today.”

    Perhaps “many” I’m not super sure about “most” but it is plausible

    “2. Joseph claims he would vote against women’s suffrage today.”
    True

    “3. You think there’s a 90% likelihood that Joseph is pulling everyone’s leg on this. (Or Poe’s law or trolling or whatever you want to call it.)”
    true

    “4. You think there’s a 10% likelihood that Joseph is expressing an earnest opinion. In which case Poe/trolling doesn’t apply.”
    My point is there is no way to know .

    “my question is do you think that having the sincere opinion that women’s suffrage was and is a bad idea is an “extremist” opinion. ”
    Of course, I think most people who actually have that view (not you) would agree.

    “Then please define why you think it’s extremist”
    Because it is well outside the overton window , ie it is a view that very few hold, this by definition makes it “extreme”
    Even you know this as you let slip “But I also think that most of them wouldn’t admit this in a survey.” why wouldn’t they admit it in a survey ?

    “And if so, you by definition think most Chareidi men are extremists.”

    I’m confused. Of course! Does anyone think otherwise (of course it depends with regard to what) but certainly with woman’s issues charediim, in general, (and in truth probably all Religous Jews) are pretty extreme. you don’t think not wanting pictures of women in a magazine, say one geared to women, is extreme? That doesnt make it wrong, it may be needed to counteract the tumah in the world so we go to extreme tznius t o fight of the extreme tumah or whatever, but I think most charedidim admit proudly that they have extremist views.

    #1734059

    Neville ChaimBerlin
    Participant

    Kluger:
    I think the alleged brilliance in it is supposed to be that he made an observation that many others had made of the internet, but worded it in such a way that could be effectively restated and reused as “Poe’s Law.” Thus, saving humanity from having to type out “that thing on the internet where you can’t tell whether or not someone is being facetious because they are saying something extreme, but not giving signals of sarcasm or humor such as an emoji.” Now, we can just say “Poe’s law.” With the amount of time we save, we’ll be colonizing the moon in no time.

    I say that Joseph is not a troll because of something I’ll call Neville’s Theorem:
    Character trolls will always have a probability of eventually revealing the hoax to be entertained by the reactions. With every unit of time, this probability increases and thus the probability of them continuing the hoax decreases. For our case, the likelihood that Joseph has built an “extreme Chareidi man” character and has been trolling on this forum for over 10 years without breaking character is extremely low.

    #1734121

    ubiquitin
    Participant

    NC
    “he made an observation that many others had made of the internet, ”

    Interesting, can you find one such mention online that predates Poe’s Law? I won’t ask you for “many” since I don’t want to hinder your moon colonizing ambitions, (If you are choosing between focusing on moon colonization vs coming up with clever theorems, I’d focus on the former)

    How do you know that “Joseph” isn’t known by the people around him, whether in shul, the bar or wherever? If he reveals himself here it is all over, his friends watch us fight over his ideas, and even his identity. Ken M. comes to mind, he doesnt reveal himself as a troll on a given forum, that’s no fun.

    And furthermore, how does Neville’e Theorem jive with “The Study of trolls: The Character Troll: Has a running theme/character that he/she plays and never deviates from.” According to the theorem, is there really no such thing?

    #1734249

    klugeryid
    Participant

    KY
    “I still don’t see any brilliance in it.”

    Like I said (twice, three times? )
    “Of course If you don’t like it that is fine too”
    It will be ok, don’t worry about it.

    Thanks for your permission to not like it.
    You can stop assuaging my feelings I was never worried about it
    You made the switch fairly smoothly but I caught you anyway
    I said I don’t see the brilliance you claimed it was.
    To which you respond I don’t have to like it??
    What does one have to do with the other? Do I like every brilliant lined?
    Do I dislike every simple statement?
    No! I give up

    #1734299

    ubiquitin
    Participant

    “Thanks for your permission to not like it.”

    You are most welcome. You seem very concerned about this it’s ok.

    “I said I don’t see the brilliance you claimed it was.
    To which you respond I don’t have to like it??”

    No switch. It’s brilliant, you misunderstood it and therefore don’t see the brilliance.
    Period

    “Do I like every brilliant lined?”
    Lol you, probably not.

    ” I give up”
    You’ve said that already, yet here we are

    #1734917

    Neville ChaimBerlin
    Participant

    “According to the theorem, is there really no such thing?”

    No, according to the theorem, character trolls usually give up after a year or so. Then, they either do a grand reveal, or just disappear without a trace, which is what RGP did for several years here apparently. There might be some flaws in the theorem, which is why it’s not a law yet.

    Both myself and Daas Yochid have been accused, in the past, of being Joseph alt accounts simply because we harbor non-MO views. I believe that what Joseph reveals on the CR is that the modern orthodox are amazed that Chareidim exist to the degree that they have to try to explain it away as “trolling.” Keep in mind, if Joseph is a true troll, the ones being trolled the worst are those of us who occasionally agree with him.

    #1756205

    Joseph
    Participant

    Yeshivishrockstar: “It doesn’t help when you have Rebbeim in in Litvish yeshivos making snide comments about other groups and insinuating that “their” derech is the only way to serve Hashem. (Joseph may be a top-notch troll, but I have had Rebbeim who would have agreed with him on everything – only nonironically – and would feel that all those who disagree with them are not on the true derech. As an aside, all those Rebbeim who shared that attribute were all graduates of one specific yeshiva.)”

    referenced comment

    If several of your Rebbeim agree with me about everything, what convinces you I’m trolling? (I’m not.)

    2. Perhaps I too am from that “one specific yeshiva”. Or, perhaps, <gasp>, I’m one of your rebbeim.

    This is no way acknowledges any correctness in any aspect of your comment.

    #1756345

    ubiquitin
    Participant

    “but I have had Rebbeim who would have agreed with him on everything”

    I have not.
    I have spent my life in charedi environments have spoken to dozens of mainstream chatredi Rabbonim, rosehi yeshivos, and have never met anyone who thought women’s suffrage must end , that we should hope to die al kiddush Hashem, who didn’t understand how mechiras chometz works (and who needed it explained year after year asking the same question as if it hasnt been discussed before).

    There are some opinions like “Calling the police/ticket maids on someone blocking your driveway is mesira.” or That giving presents is chukas hagoy which are not normative charedi views among those Ive met or know other than some Am haaratzim who thought those were normative charedi opinons so they repeated them (of course once pointed out why they are mistaken, and they still harbor those am haratzos-dik views It is safe to assume they are trolling)

    NC
    (I just saw this comment now)
    “I believe that what Joseph reveals on the CR is that the modern orthodox are amazed that Chareidim exist to the degree that they have to try to explain it away as “trolling.” ”

    Yes, some people do do that . and I agree with your general sentiment. Though I dont think all of Joseph’s comments fall into that category. While I disagree with Joseph on many things eg Zionism,. I didnt use those examples, since while I disagree with him. I have met people with those views.

    #1756404

    ☕️coffee addict
    Participant

    Ubiq,

    How do you know they didn’t hold those things?

    1) did you ask them?
    2) even if you did maybe they didn’t want to get into an argument and have it spread that he holds those views

    What type of mainstream rabbanim are you talking about we’re they litvish, chassidish, sfardim?

    #1756435

    Joseph
    Participant

    ubiquitin: Are you denying the truthfulness of Yeshivishrockstar’s personal experience, as he described it, regarding him having had multiple Rebbeim who agree with me — non-ironically — across the board?

    #1756524

    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Joseph

    I am certain he was exaggerating.

    Definitely not “everything ” Even if you convinced me that it is a standard view among “Rebbeim in Litvish yeshivos ” that ” women’s suffrage must end” And that somehow in all my years I never encountered this view, you definitely couldn’t convince me that many “Rebbeim in in Litvish yeshivo” think that “What if I don’t want to buy back the chometz from the goy? I should be able to force him to keep it, and pay, just as he has the right to elect to keep it even if that wasn’t my expectation.”

    furthermore even, you agree that he was exaggerating. surely you concede that SOME of his rabbeim would oppose they ver yexistence of “Joseph” spedning so much time on online forums. Are you telling me you think ALL ” “Rebbeim in in Litvish yeshivos” Are ok with incessant commenting on YWN ?

    #1756412

    Is “we should hope to die al kiddush Hashem” not correct?
    Please cite a source against it. (Maybe I’m just ignorant.)

    #1756585

    ☕️coffee addict
    Participant

    Ubiq,

    To answer your second answer’s question (I know sounds a little confusing) those rabbanim didn’t want the PC police coming after them and make their life miserable

    A good example is the story of קמצא ובר קמצא but over here it doesn’t matter so much if they hold women’s suffrage or not because it’s already done with

    In other words if you asked them 200 years ago they wouldn’t be afraid of saying no

    #1756647

    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Randomex

    I’m not saying it is incorrect (although I do think so) we can play the “agadata game” where you bring R’ Akiva saying how he longed t o fulfill being mikayim bechol nafshecha, and I’ll brin the agadata of Moshe Rabbeinu having seen both R’ Akiva;s end (menachos 29b) and AAron hakoein longed for Aron hakohen ‘s.

    There is a longer thread on this very point and I think reasonable people can disagree

    It may be the correct view, but it is not the standard chareidi view in my experience. Has your perception been different?

    #1756671

    Yeshivishrockstar
    Participant

    Joseph: “If several of your Rebbeim agree with me about everything, what convinces you I’m trolling? (I’m not.)
    2. Perhaps I too am from that “one specific yeshiva”. Or, perhaps, <gasp>, I’m one of your rebbeim.”

    Berniker – is that you? (Mods – dont worry – name has been changed.)
    Seriously, though, the reason why I assume you are a troll is those rebbeim would hold that anyone who uses the internet has no chelek in olam haba, and “us yeshivaleit” who stay away from it are far better than all those other riffraff who pretend to call themselves frum but have smartphones and are really no different than the tzionim and haskala” etc etc.
    Btw, Joseph, did you guess yet which yeshiva it is?

    #1756738

    ubiquitin
    Participant

    CA
    I’m not sure about that I have heard countless “non-PC” views from my Reeebeim over the years. Many probably more “non-PC” than taking away the right to vote. I’m doubtful that on THIS issue there is some secret cabal to hide it from the hamoin am, but have Joseph give over the secretive Torah True view via the coffee room.

    “In other words if you asked them 200 years ago they wouldn’t be afraid of saying no”

    I’m not sure the relevance. Yes if I asked them 200 or even 100 years ago they may have opposed woman’s suffrage. But that isnt the discussion at hand.

    CA a simple question:. do you think the mainstream view among “Rebbeim in Litvish yeshivos” is that “women’s suffrage must end” ?

    #1756831

    Joseph
    Participant

    Ubiq: You’re grasping on straws here. I also once posted that I prefer chicken cooked rather than fried. I’m surprised you haven’t yet used that as another proof that the mainstream view among Rebbeim in Litvish yeshivos isn’t always like me, since there’s no consensus on how to consume a chicken. Or that since I posted in 2016 that I voted for Ted Cruz in the presidential primaries, surely you’ll use that as further proof since that wasn’t necessarily the mainstream view among Rebbeim in Litvish yeshivos on who to vote for.

    What’s this harping of yours about women’s suffrage? That’s my political opinion, not necessarily halachic opinion. In any event nitpicking on this individual view or that individual view that I posted in no way, shape or form disputes what Yeshivishrockstar pointed out. (And note that Yeshivishrockstar admits to himself being more liberal on Jewish/religious issues, yet nevertheless makes this observation.) That there are many mainstream rebbeim, rabbonim and members of the hamon hoam who overall and generally agree with my entire worldview and hashkafos. Even if you can cite a small number of exceptions that don’t have a widespread consensus.

    #1756904

    ☕️coffee addict
    Participant

    No

    But I wouldn’t be surprised if they held “it should have never been started”

    And I think that in essence it what joe was getting at, it just makes the thread more controversial the way joe worded it

    #1756925

    user176
    Participant

    Ubiq

    “You just have trouble conceding when wrong (not something that I struggle with. )”

    Lol… I guess this thread is the exception?

    And one thing is for sure. Poe’s law most definitely does not apply when a person clearly and unequivocally states that they are serious. So no, Joseph is not the epitome of Poe’s law.

    FYI I’ve only read until about the middle of the first page of comments…

    #1756937

    ubiquitin
    Participant

    CA

    “But I wouldn’t be surprised if they held “it should have never been started””

    Oh me neither, but that isnt the discussion.

    As to the issue we ARE discussing , you said “No” So we are in perfect agreement.

    “And I think that in essence it what joe was getting at, it just makes the thread more controversial the way joe worded it”

    nope, He insisted (on that thread) that he meant it the way he wrote it, which you concede is NOT the standard charedi view today.

    user 176
    “Lol… I guess this thread is the exception?”
    Nope

    and FYI I only read until about the middle of your comment

    #1757331

    user176
    Participant

    Ubiq

    The beauty of it is that the more you deny being stumped here the more you prove your struggling to concede you were wrong.

    You read the beginning of my comment, and the end. My maybe you skipped over the middle? That’s really the main point..

    And just to explain, the reason I usually say whether or not I read all the comments is to put context on my comment, just in case it was already addressed or the convo has taken a turn you’ll know what I’m talking about.

    #1757367

    yeshivishrockstar2
    Participant

    Joseph: I responded to you yesterday, but my account has been shadowbanned… maybe there’s some deep secret i let out?

    Either way, the gist of my response was that I believe you’re a troll because those rebbeim would never ever use the internet, because “unzer” are way better than that. (Who knows, maybe the mods will go through the spam folder and you will have the pleasure of reading my full response.)

    Ubiq: I agree with Joseph that woman’s suffrage should be repealed. If woman could vote, the only democrat that would have been elected since FDR would be Jimmy Carter.

    #1757403

    ☕️coffee addict
    Participant

    Yeshivish,

    You probably mean couldn’t vote

    #1757420

    ubiquitin
    Participant

    user
    “And just to explain, the reason I usually say whether or not I read all the comments is to put context on my comment, just in case it was already addressed or the convo has taken a turn you’ll know what I’m talking about.”

    Yes I got that.
    you are till stuck on Poe’s Law the conversation has long since moved on (Poe’s Law was last mentioned in May) . And No I don’t know what you are talking about So you tactic of Jumping in mid conversation and sticking in that caveat, did not help and just makes you sound foolish.
    Read the thread (it isnt long, though it is boring) and THEN if you think you have something to contribute feel free to join in.

    Yeshivish
    “I agree with Joseph that woman’s suffrage should be repealed.”
    Mazel Tov! shkoyach. There is another thread on that topic. that isnt the discussion here.

    #1757483

    Joseph
    Participant

    Yeshivishrockstar: You clearly don’t understand what a troll is. You can’t agree with a troll since a troll, by definition, is posting insincere (and that’s the key) positions. Yet you state you agree with my position on women’s suffrage. Ubiq also tried that. He was sure no one, really no one, would agree with me on that “extreme” position. Yet even among the small number of currently active CR posters you aren’t the first or second person to voice agreement with me on just that “extreme” issue alone.

    What you’re really trying to say is that I’m not such a tzaddik in accordance with the lifestyle of tzidkus that you feel I strongly advocate. Okay. I never claimed to be a tzaddik or to be perfect, in accordance with the ideal Torah positions I think and advocate we all should aim for. If I were a real tzaddik you are correct that I shouldn’t be on the internet altogether or at least as much. 100%. Nevertheless that doesn’t mean I should stop advocating the ideal Torah lifestyles just as your rebbeim who you said 100% agree with all my positions, non-ironically. I’m not ironic either, even if you feel I might be hypocritical sometimes. I truly believe it is the ideal Torah life. And I aim for it, even if I’m imperfect in succeeding.

    To take a common example, can someone who is bittul zman not advocate that people not be bitul zman or at least do so less? Can someone who uses unreliable hechsherim not admit he is wrong, even if he has trouble stopping himself, and publicly advocate that people stick to reliable hechsherim? Can someone who embezzled not advocate that people be law abiding and not steal?

    #1757541

    Phil
    Participant

    “To take a common example, can someone who is bittul zman not advocate that people not be bitul zman or at least do so less?”

    Joseph,

    You have made a very important observation about yourself so please contemplate my comment and don’t lash out defensively. When proper leaders with the mandate to rebuke others exercise it, they do so only when necessary, they first include themselves in the criticism and they then discuss how everyone can improve. You are not a Rav and not a Rebbi so your mandate to rebuke others is non-existent. Yet somehow you have turned a twisted view of Hocheiach Tochiach into your only purpose in life. You waste countless hours on this site incessantly criticizing entire groups of Jews on every imagined shortcoming, yet you never admit to having those very faults yourself.

    To answer your question: no; one who engages in bittul zman, uses unreliable hechsheirim and embezzles cannot criticize others for doing so because that’s the epitome of hypocrisy and also the very definition of a troll. Hocheiach Tochiach is not the primary objective of any sane person. Criticism should generally be directed inward for the purpose of self-improvement. When a person occasionally admits to their own faults, expresses remorse and gently shares with others how they were able to improve, that’s a mitzvah. Constantly beating up others because of one’s own flaws is the opposite of a mitzvah

    tiny edit 

    #1757526

    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Joseph
    “He was sure no one, really no one, would agree with me on that “extreme” position. ”

    i’m not sure what gave you that impression. Of course people would agree with that extreme position. I ve met several.

    “can someone who is bittul zman not advocate that people not be bitul zman or at least do so less?”\

    while not addressed to me allow me to answer:
    it depends. If said person is trying to avoid bittul zman, he is making an effort to work at it.. Then I agree he doesnt have to be perfect to point out problems in others
    If however he says something along the lines of “Bitul zman is wrong I do it all the time and dont plan on changing but you should stop” Then he is insincere. Or in internet lingo a “troll”

    also your defintion of a troll “a troll, by definition, is posting insincere (and that’s the key) positions. ”
    Isnt true either see NC’s definitive listing of known troll species. not all post insincere positions

    #1757550

    🍫Syag Lchochma
    Participant

    Phil – separately, I agree completely with the first paragraph, as does halacha and any adom gadol who has spoken out about rebuking others. regarding the second paragraph tho, I think you are correct that it is hypocritical to criticize others for things you regularly do. But he didn’t say that. He said that you can still preach doing what is right even if you yourself are deficient. I think there is a difference between preaching what is right, and criticizing others. I will not imply that I think Joseph’s methods are anything constructive, halachically appropriate or beneficial, but I do believe that your response does not correspond to his comment in that one issue.

    Kol Hakavod

    #1757543

    Joseph
    Participant

    Phil: Your comment is ripe with incorrect characterizations and factual errors. But the main mistake of yours that needs to be corrected is your not being cognizant that the obligation to give tochacha is upon ever Jew in the world. Even those imperfect in whatever area.

    Please read this thread to correct your knowledge:

    The requirement for everyone to give Tochachah

    #1757548

    🍫Syag Lchochma
    Participant

    This is so exciting! I personal post from Joseph, and a calm, well articulated post from Phil!

    I have the shivers!

    #1757549

    Joseph
    Participant

    C’mon, ubiq, you were certain I was insincere. You suspect that of many of my posts. For what reason you suspect that I have no idea. But so much so about women’s suffrage that you actually started a thread soliciting everyone’s opinion after I reassured you that I really am sincere after your expression of disbelief:

    Joseph Poll

    #1757584

    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Joseph

    apologies If i’m being unclear

    “you were certain I was insincere”
    – correct. and I still am certain (90% certain) that you dont really believe that.

    This does not negate “Of course people would agree with that extreme position.”

    which is also true.
    Of course SOME people believe that. I did not mean to imply that all 7.58 billion on the planet beelive women suffrage should be continued. There are all sorts of people out there with all sorts of kooky ideas.

    Just having interacted with you for several years now, and watched you in action for years longer I do not think you are one of those people.

    #1757561

    🍫Syag Lchochma
    Participant

    that’s a riot Joseph!! he should correct his knowledge by reading a different thread of you also giving your viewpoint that nobody agreed with. cute.

    #1757569

    yehudayona
    Participant

    Joseph, rife, not ripe. Were you invited to the White House shindig on social media? If not, why not?

    #1757591

    Phil
    Participant

    “The requirement for everyone to give Tochachah”

    Joseph,

    Thanks for opening my eyes so that I can properly fulfill this obligation! I’m going to start with you:

    You are filled with hate and with jealousy of other Jews and only love yourself. You advocate violence against women and children. You are a self-admitted hypocrite and a nasty troll. You waste untold hours of your life on criticizing and hurting other Jews. The only mitzvah you pretend to care about is “Hocheiach Tochiach” but do so in the most egregiously self-serving way, thereby violating the prohibition of “V’lo Sisa Alav Chet” every time. You regularly engage in Lashon Hara and Motzei Shem Ra against entire communities of Jews you have never met. You have therefore made repentance for the countless sins you commit on a daily basis impossible. You misrepresent what little Torah knowledge you glean from the web and deliberately pervert it to cause massive Chilul Hashem. Your very existence is an embodiment of Sinas Chinam which prevents our redemption.

    I am truly appreciative of this newfound understanding so I sincerely pray that your existence in this world and the next one be a mirror reflection of the way you treat Hashem’s children.

    #1757607

    Phil
    Participant

    Joseph,

    Did that fulfill your exacting standards for Tochachah or would you like some more?

    #1757613

    Joseph
    Participant

    Phil, when I say every Jew is required to give tochacha, that is only referring to a shomer Torah v’Mitzvos.

    Drastically edited 

    #1757568

    klugeryid
    Participant

    Those claiming that Josef is not fulfilling הוכח תוכיח because he is not a rabbi or something of that sort,
    There is a huge difference between giving SOMEONE מוסר wherein one can lay claim to someone not Being in the proper position to be giving others musasr
    Whereas discussing what you believe is the utopian ideal for your religion on an anonymous internet forum, anyone Is entitled to post their opinion.
    Why not he is not “giving anyone mussar “.
    Again I see a well developed, I’m my opinion, totally undeserved hatred towards Joseph.
    And the only way I personally can understand it is that his positions get some people very nervous.
    Which IMHO usually are more in line with authentic Judaism than most of the others here.

    As a test, I’ll repeat a question I asked a while ago on a different thread, which got no answer there.
    What should be the punishment for someone who is מאנס a woman who was previously married and is now divorced

    #1757646

    ubiquitin
    Participant

    “As a test, I’ll repeat a question I asked a while ago on a different thread, which got no answer there.
    What should be the punishment for someone who is מאנס a woman who was previously married and is now divorced”

    I’m confused. That was my question.

    #1757647

    ☕️coffee addict
    Participant

    Kluger,

    Would he have to pay her tzaar?

    #1757659

    klugeryid
    Participant

    Ubiq,
    I don’t remember which thread it was on so I can’t look.
    I seen to recall you asked a similar question, and I responded and changed the details slightly to this.
    C A
    If there was, then yes.
    If not, it’s at worst a Lav which with hassrah , would get malkus. Possibly it’s not even that much.
    In western society, it’s just one step below murder.
    Most people I have asked this to seem to lean more to the western feelings on this topic and have a rough time accepting that the Torah doesn’t view it that way

    #1757661

    ☕ DaasYochid ☕
    Participant

    The Torah views embarrassing someone as a step below murder, and this is worse than any form of embarrassment I can think of.

    #1757666

    Joseph
    Participant

    DY: What is the halachic punishment for embarrassing someone?

    #1757697

    klugeryid
    Participant

    And yet one only needs to pay.
    Whereas in American thought if there was a death penalty, they would give it

    #1757698

    klugeryid
    Participant

    Or to put it a different way,
    Since you are seeming to try to justify its “severity “by pulling out the embarrassment card.
    If you call someone a nasty name in public, you are embarrassing them.
    Yet would you say that that is the worst crime short of murder?
    (of course now you will say something of the sort. But honestly, had I asked, do you think someone should go to jail for life if they call someone a nasty name in public, you’d say I’m Josef like and I’m just nasty trolling.
    Yet from the embarrassment angle, they are both the same.)
    I’m not so sure you are right anyway, because if it was done in private, that may not be called embarrassing.

    #1757772

    ubiquitin
    Participant

    KY
    you are right regarding the discussion there. (I asked a confused individual who thought if something is’nt explicitly mentioned as assur then it wasn’t I asked him if that meant it was ok for a goy to be meanes an unmarried woman, he didint answer and you threw in this question though I’m not sure the relevance there (and thats what I “responded” there).

    You seem to be making a similar mistake here.
    A few questions if you don’t mind

    Is it ok for a goy to be meanes an unmarried woman?
    whats the punishment for molesting a child?
    What the punishment for killing someone without eidim?

    Another obvious mistake is this one “Yet from the embarrassment angle, they are both the same.” Obviously you dont mean that (I hope)

    Also I’m not sure what this is doing on this thread.
    This was the original thread https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/waiters-finger-was-in-my-my-soup

    #1757781

    klugeryid
    Participant

    Ubiq
    A few answers
    Is it ok for a goy to be meanes an unmarried woman?
    OK is a vague word. I’m not sure what the issur would be though, except once codified into law, then it’s dinim and actually punishable by death. Like everything else for them. Same as stealing a penny.

    whats the punishment for molesting a child?
    Depends what you mean by molesting.
    Short of meanes, probably nothing in dinay adam.
    Meanes would depend on genders….

    What the punishment for killing someone without eidim?
    First time offender?
    Nothing through human intervention

    Why it’s on this thread?
    Because Josef is being lambasted for his so far outlandish positions that he must be trolling, to which I am trying to show that some of them are only thought of as outlandish because people have western “morals “instead of Torah morals

    #1757951

    ubiquitin
    Participant

    KY

    so I have this right,
    In you view according to “Torah morals” tm There should be no punishment for molesting a child (“Depends what you mean by molesting.” you know what I mean) , you’re not quite sure if it is wrong for a goy to be meanes a woman (if not codified by them) . do I have your position correct?

    (As an aside my Rav asked me to ask you if you went to Yeshiva, he says its impossible to believe that someone who went through the yeshiva system can have such a perverse view of Torah This is a long standing debate I have with him that modern Yeshiva education stifles critical thinking. This post of yours (if I have your position correct, and if you went to yeshiva) would be a perfect example

    #1758019

    klugeryid
    Participant

    Ubiq
    Yes basically you are understanding correctly what I’m trying to say.
    One can say that a molester is a mazik, and as such is chayav the same as any other mazik .
    But that is not a special chiyuv for molestation.

    You can tell your rov that I went to a mainstream American charaydi yeshiva.
    If you can , please find out from him, chapter and verse, the punishment for a non Jew being meanes a non Jewish woman, and the source for special treatment (ie extra severity ) of a molester.
    (please don’t get me wrong. I have no soft feelings for molesters and would not allow my child in one’s presence. But that doesn’t necessarily translate into severe punishment for the fellow. I don’t make hashems cheshbonos ). If the torch does not proscribe a specific punishment, whether rabbinical or Torah, then it normally indicates a lower severity.

    I don’t see how my post shows stifling me critical thinking.
    I may be flat out wrong, but I am certainly engaging in non standard thinking.
    If anything I think most people would never entertain such ideas since nobody else does. And they would never bother to think for themselves as to whether they are correct or not.
    I believe I am engaging in critical thought.
    Again, I may be factually totally wrong, and I’m open to hearing it. But just for someone to tell me “that’s perverse thought ”
    I don’t really give any weight to that.
    If I’m wrong show me.
    I stated clear supposedly factual positions. If I’m wrong it should be pretty easy to show

Viewing 50 posts - 51 through 100 (of 188 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.