[ SECRET POST #2708 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2708 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.
[Degrassi Junior High/Degrassi High and Saved By The Bell]


__________________________________________________



03.
[The Cinema Snob]

__________________________________________________



04.
[Phil Robertson from Duck Dynasty]


__________________________________________________



05.
[Silicon Valley]


__________________________________________________



06.
[Xavier Dolan]


__________________________________________________



07.
[Pacific Rim]


__________________________________________________



08.
[Sailor Moon]


__________________________________________________



09.
[Iwan Rheon]


__________________________________________________



10.
[Love Stage!!]


__________________________________________________



11.
[The Losers (movie)]


__________________________________________________



12.
[K-pop]










Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 052 secrets from Secret Submission Post #387.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ], [ 1 - posted twice ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[cbrachyrhynchos]

The same idea has been expressed previously in religion-wank threads.

[(Anonymous)]

This is not incompatible with it being a troll.

[(Anonymous)]

+1 we're just about to crack 200 comments I would say OP is very pleased with themselves RN

[cbrachyrhynchos]

I suspect we have different definitions of "trolling" then.

[(Anonymous)]

Probably!

As I've said a couple times, I think you can believe something you say and still be trolling. Just to make that clear.

[cbrachyrhynchos]

Then you don't understand the definition of trolling, since that term excludes legitimately held and argued positions.

[(Anonymous)]

I don't think it does. Or, at least, those dividing lines are nowhere near as brightly drawn as you're making them out to be.

What I have in mind is a situation where you have your beliefs but you argue them in an intentionally inflammatory way, maybe exaggerating a little, maybe going a little beyond what you really believe, in order to start a fight or piss people off or prove some kind of point. I would consider that trolling, because you're arguing in a way that's specifically and consciously intended to cause arguments and generate a reaction. But it's not necessarily something that you're opposed to. It's something that you basically agree with.

And that's my best guess of what's going on here.

In any case: the possibility that some people could sincerely believe positions like what OP said does not preclude the possibility that OP is trolling. Even if what OP said were objectively true, that would not preclude the possibility that OP was trolling. Certainly the fact that a certain person in a conversation agrees with the OP in no way demonstrates that they're not trolling.

[diet_poison]

Nah, because you can still espouse a legitimately held position for the express purpose of getting other people to argue about it.