Flame Warriors ~ View topic

The Truth
Despite her indirect methods, The Truth is a master of inflicting damage. The Truth prefers to eviscerate someone and claim she's "just being honest", or saying something appalling and saying she's "open about her opinion". Of course, it is a rare instance indeed when her honest opinion turns out to be honest or just an opinion. Similar to the Evil Clown, with his barbed "jokes", The Truth uses barbed "honesty". The Truth relies on seeming like she is misguided to deflect anger. The truth about The Truth is she's vindictive and delights in stabbing people in the front. Repeatedly.

Some Warriors may be put off by The Truth. However, she doesn't linger in any one place after she's drawn the ire of a stronger Warrior. Once The Truth has upset Warriors to the point they don't care how they come off, she often experiences the internet equivilent of being thrown in front of a train.

The Truth is a challenging Warrior to attack, early in her stay in a forum. Despite seeming clever by her tactics, The Truth relies entirely on beating people with a white flag. She is especially weak to her own methods being turned around on her.
_________________

Tireless Rebutter / Archivist
The Grand Suggestion List

This rules.

Thanks
_________________

Tireless Rebutter / Archivist
The Grand Suggestion List

No problem

Reminds me of people that tend to overload their messages with phrases like "cold hard facts", "the way things are", "common sense", etc. and if someone disagrees, says something like "you know I'm right, but you're just unwilling to admit it because of political correctness."

The description is so apt. Cool

Not uncommon to use statements like " it was best you knew that" in the aftermath of expressing an " opinion" and presenting it as, a commonlly held view (which in many cases - it wasn't).

I think what motivates them can vary.

Those I've struck a number that belong in this catagory (but are a sub group). They are usually superficial, and have some pretty deluded ideals. They really do beleive they are expressing a honest opinion. I think they would be called Honestly Deluded Truth or Twisted Truth
_________________
The important thing is knowing who owns the fence

Clueless Newb Joined: 07 Jan 2005 Posts: 15

Is it just me, or are you guys suggestings warriors that are only bad?

If someone sucks up to someone else, that would of course be bad. If someone tells it how it is, then that's not good either.

I understand what you're saying here, irritus. People take advantage of the nobility that involves in the act of telling the truth in order to bait people, but you also need to understand that there are people who simply tell the truth because they thinks that's the way to go.

I would then suggest that you change the name of the warrior into something else.

The name is meant to be ironic. This type of person constantly insults people under the guise of truth and openness. Typically what they are saying is either an opinion or a complete lie to insult someone. This has nothing to do with being honest of open. You can be honest without being cruel, and you can be open without apathy for the feelings of others.

The Truth is called as such because that is always how s/he presents herself/himself.
_________________

Tireless Rebutter / Archivist
The Grand Suggestion List

Dark Lord of the Stealth Joined: 27 Dec 2004 Posts: 361

I don't think it is true that The Truth is necessarily a weak warrior. I have seen posters who could be characterized this way who were also Kung Fu Master or Big Dog. In those cases, they are intimidating to other forum members and often end up being asked to leave the forums and/or banned.

On the other hand, as Anittas suggested, I don't think warriors who are thought of in this way are necessarily acting in bad faith. Sometimes they have encountered a Swarm or Cyber Sisters or run up against a group of Royals, or are trying to break away from one of those groups that they have been a part of, and there are hard truths that they honestly feel need to be aired. I think this is at least as common as when The Truth is merely action out of spite or malice. "The Truth? You can't handle the truth!" is the sad banal fact of many peoples' closed minded existence, on forums and otherwise. It's like if you end up on a forum of cyber sisters that think Ashlee Simpson is a better singer than Diana Ross -- for whatever reason, they can't handle the truth, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't need to be said.

The Truth is almost never posting for the benefit of those posters who 'can't handle the truth', but rather for all the lurkers and other (usually marginalized) sub-groups in the forum community who would appreciate it if someone would just get the courage to point out that the emperor has no clothes. I think some warriors get into a habit of playing this role, and it does not necessarily mean that they are acting out of malice.

Anyway, I think it's a good suggestion but needs to be reworked a little.

--Alistair

I think there is some confusion going on here. If you read the desciption of The Truth, you'll notice I never state that she tells the truth. In fact, I repeatedly state she posts insults and opinions under the guise of honesty and being open about her thoughts.

She's not a weak warrior, either. I said she was challenging at first to attack. Since she is posing as an honest and open person, it's hard to attack her arguments without looking like you're closed-minded and attacking a dissenter. However, her main weakness is being attacked with her own methods. Usually when people wise up, or she pisses off the wrong person, she winds up getting "the truth" and people being "open" about her.
_________________

Tireless Rebutter / Archivist
The Grand Suggestion List

Dark Lord of the Stealth Joined: 27 Dec 2004 Posts: 361

Ah, I've been thinking about this, and think I've determined the problem. My best guess is that people are interpretting this as a personal issue I have with the voice of dissent. Let me reiterate this point: The Truth does not tell the truth. It is not a matter of interpretation. She brutally attacks and upsets people and then claims she's just being honest and open about her opinions. It's not about being open and honest, it's about hurting people and blaming them for being upset. Also, please stop turning "open about opinions" into "open-mindedness".

I think it will be easiest to clear this stuff up with an example of The Truth in action.

WARNING: I've chosen a racial remark because it is much easier to catch than subtler issues The Truth prefers to attack people on. Typically The Truth will stick with issues that won't incite a mob to beat her intolerant ass over. If you're terribly sensitive, don't read it. On a side note, I'm not going to put a disclaimer to save my ass; go ahead and call me a racist for stating racism is bad. I don't respect the opinion of stupid people, or people just posting to get a reaction out of me.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The scenario will be a poster complaining he didn't qualify for a scholarship from the United Negro College Fund. Most posters would respond supportingly. Assuming they had the guts to get shredded for racism (or were claiming to be black), this is how Evil Clown and The Truth would reply:

Evil Clown: "School is overrated. Try for something more realistic, like a career in basketball or rap."

The Truth: "Hey, you came close. Look on the bright side. With all the selective breeding slave-owners did to eliminate intelligence, you must be from one of the lines they missed."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Two very cruel, stupid, and racist remarks, but notice the difference in delivery. The Truth has picked something from history and presented it in such a way that couldn't help but offend. At the same time, it is presented in a way that is difficult to attack her over. After all, while she left out the breeding program was unsuccessful, she never said it succeeded either. She's delivered an underhanded compliment and a lie by omittion.

Much like the Evil Clown disguises himself as a misunderstood comic, The Truth disguises herself as a misunderstood helper. The Truth doesn't necessarily believe what she says, she delights in pissing people off. Often she will take a minor problem someone has and exagerate it, or push people's buttons just to watch them flip out. Saying she is honest and open about her opinion is a cover.

Again, and for the last time, I named her The Truth because that's what she attempts to disguise her insults as. She is not a misunderstood honest person.
_________________

Tireless Rebutter / Archivist
The Grand Suggestion List

First edit Tue Jan 18, 2005 11:57 pm approx
Second edit, Wed Jan 19, 2005 7:31 am, just fixing a single spelling error which I've been incorrectly, for the last week, catching and fixing the original which was correct afterall. %-6 - won't bother to color code edit though.
Third edit Thu Jan 20, 2005 7:03 am approx Added a broad quick description of Truth and fixed the suggested truth label to read General Truth. The original label suggested -Truth- , I felt was too ironic. Great Description, but I think using a label like Evil Truth, it would have been received better.

Woops - I didn't follow the new description to the letter, as I assumed it was close to Pinnacle.

Yeeaahh. And I know a few like that too. While the exact definition, could be said to be a sub group of Jerk, I think you need to broaden it to a larger group, and include the few types that exist.

Here are some suggestions so you can see what I mean, I've just grouped them into the different warriors I've encountered.

Truth - a warrior who specialises in confronting members and groups with the "truth" of the matter. They like to operate from a safe position, (much like a snipper), which is behind the relative saftey of what they have perceived/concocted to be truth. Often they attack midstream in a thread, and it's seldom on-topic. What matters, may only be an aspect of the overall arguement, or none at all. (Well, none that are clear). So in some respects, they operate a bit like Issues (but they could never fit in the Issues catagory, as their pet issues are usually chained up somewhere safe and secure)

General Truth. - The member that turns up and after 10 seconds (fig. speaking), assumes they can see just how it is, and feels the need to post some certin truths about other members, so the member can truely see how it really is. They usually get it so wrong, but are too stupid to back down from the onslaught the ensues. They are known to quote the benifits of a fresh perspective.

Blunt Truth - These members really just don't care, if anyone is upset by what they have to offer. They lack empathy, so they operate without much effort to be sensitive. Forums that have been polarised with some silly ideals, are known to call forth Blunt Truths.

Good Truth - indeed a wise and insightful warrior, more likely to be a passive fighter. Can gently but very effectively point out concepts/ perceptions held by certin members are flawed in some manner.

Your definition I would call Evil Truth or Wicked Truth.

Real Truth - Passive member who wouldn't hurt a fly, but is someone too stupid or naive to know when it's best to water down the stark reality or tell a little white lie when required. Never learns or knows any better, despite being attacked repeatedly as a response. (Just think what would happen if you were Real Truth and real sensitive hubby asks "Does this make me look..")

Honestly Deluded Truth or Twisted Truth - a "Social Cop" to an extent. Those who are superficial and deludedly believe they know the truth, but mostly confine their activities to character assassination. (Though they really do think there are just defining who someone is.) Probably a variant of Ideologue. They often believe they are some sort of people expert. They honestly think they are capable of offering true perspective to a member. Often, they take it upon themselves to inform a member what the "majority" of the forum really thinks. HDT will incredulously dismiss arguements to the contrary, citing along the lines, most members think that deep down. Those I've come across, I see as shallow, superficial, back stabbing warriors on some ego building trip. You can almost hear "I am perfect" or "I'm a well -adjusted... you are not". (they (almost) never say they are, as a proportion like to look humble and modest) Their "truths" can be quite skewed.
_________________
The important thing is knowing who owns the fence

Yeah. I think a lot of the problem was the name is too subtle. I call her the The Truth because that is what she disguises herself as. Sort of like a wolf in sheep's clothing. While she's a common warrior, she tends to move from place-to-place often. I suspect a lot of people haven't personally been attacked by one of her kind.

The Truth is just a role, not a code of ethics about honesty. Most of my encounters with Evil Clowns make me view it as a more commonly male role. The Truth is like the female version, combining the subtle indirectness of the Evil Clown with the anti-social behavior of the Jerk. Doesn't mean men can't be this role, it's simply more often they gravitate towards evil clownhood (or jerkhood if they can't use subtlety).

I don't think I've ever seen The Truth spare anyone. She arrives, insults people right and left indiscriminantely, gets ripped to shreds, and runs off. Like... an honest person might say Diana Ross sang better than Ashlee Simpson, despite that they might be pissing her fans off. The Truth might imply forum members prefer Ashlee because she's white and their subconscious racism biases their preferences.

I'll work on a more fitting name that won't result in biasing people before they read the description.

First edit Wed Jan 19, 2005 2:42 pm fix typo
Second edit Thu Jan 20, 2005 6:41 am approx to reflect more apt label

Hmm I'd say the use of irony isn't working for you in this instance. This is due to the "vast" range, a warrior labeled "Truth"could encompass.

Sorry if I'm trying to change the goal posts on you, but I think it needs to be done. It needs to be developed into a clear and distinct class of warrior.

Spinning your label around, I'd call your description Evil or Wicked Truth. Presently your version of Truth - I see as a jeering person hiding behind some fake or altered belief. . I've seen the same used, to goad the opposition into moving out of their well guarded position. Many think it's a means to say something unpleasant, without looking like a Jerk. (like claiming someone thought blah .. read, barbed rat droppings dressed up.) However, though not a good fit, many would be placed in the Jerk catagory. Some carefully construct their truth, as a means to position the battlefield, so more favourable arguements can be deployed. You can hardly call them a Jerk. I have seen one or two, though many I would have just dismissed as some misguided and/or cold cruel idiot.

Strawman Truth. Building a Straw man is actually a tatic in the battlefield, and encompasses more than the singular method that a Strawman Truth operates. It is probably not good form for me to use a tatic with a warrior type. Anyhow, see the Strawman Truth as the warrior who presents the truth of what the other side stands for, but constructs it in a manner, which is not very defensible. After promptly stomping all over it, with the help of other members, quickly declares victory and slips off the field to lurk.

Pinnacle (of truth) [you probably won't like this as a sub type of Truth, but seeing as I initially mistook Pinnacle for a HDTruth, I'd say same catagory at least] - A social climber with aspirations of being a Royal ie they want to be unquestioned and respected. They are well focused on the social pecking order. They know that in oreder to get up, they must drag others down. The warrior works by simply picking whatever is different from them in an enemy and finds a way to spin it a bad light, and packages that, as the Truth. They overlook the same differences in a "friend". They are particularly obsessed with controlling the mound they build and have declared themselves rulers of. [Ok I hope I didn't murder your description too much]

The most common version I observe (General Truth it is a sub type of The Truth) , is the newish member on the forum. They are there for a short period, and start to involve themselves, amongst other things, by correcting attitudes/ideas of other members, or joining in with another ill informed warrior who is doing the same.. I see this warrior in action about once a week. That's why I'd suggest them as The General Truth, as ironically they don't know all the facts, but are motivated to creating a better forum community, though the use of "Truth".

Blunt Truth needs to be mentioned next. There is both Calm and Angry sub types.

I've seen more Angry Blunt Truths than calm ones. It doesn't refer to an arguing tatic. All warriors worth their salt will outline the facts of the matter, and are inclined to less sensitive when angered, in the heat of battle. Rather it is generally the disaffected member of a clique/group. It can also be the member who admired a group, and had a lot of personal contact with them , but was rejected. In other words, they are now an outsider. Not uncommon for them to vent their frustration towards the entire forum. With cutting remarks directed at other members, they decide to brandish their new found perspective. Some are content to slowly haunt the old clique they were part of (or would have like to have been part of) , with every little bit of dirty laundry they can remember to share with the rest of the forum. They relish putting a back stabbing mate into proper perspective.

Calm Blunt Truths. Oddly perceived as a bit gruff, even when they deliver statements, that had they been a Jerk, would have set Jerk's ears ablaze. It seems their consistent straight shooting quirk is accepted as part of their persona, as they rarely act any differently. They are sort of indiferent.

Good Truth is niether a Diplomat or an Eagle Scout, though at one stage earlier in life, they might have been, or if not, would have, if they had access to the internet.. I would say they share some similarities with Lurker and at times Big Cat. Along with wise and insightful, they have an excelent command of language, with a talent of summing things up so they are easily understood, and an ability to capture the moment perfectly. There are plenty of wannabe Good Truths around and about..

Real Truth and Honestly Deluded Truth or Twisted Truth, don't really need a further explanation.
_________________
The important thing is knowing who owns the fence

Ah, I didn't notice you editted the post from earlier or I'd have replied sooner. The suggestions you gave could not be used as subgroups of The Truth. The reason being, all of them are described as being honest (though not necessarily correct). As they are honest, they could never be sub-groups of The Truth.

I'm not sure why you're fitting Pinnacle and The Truth together. Pinnacles are social climbers, but for the most part they try to create a society they appoint themselves head of. While they do insult people based on any difference from themselves, it's because Pinnacles aren't terribly creative. Also, despite the fact that Pinnacles will attack people just to see what they can get away with, they're typically peace-mongerers and can't stand engaged fighting.

The Truth is extremely devious, but rarely is interested in online status. She simply delights in hurting people. Typically she is a good deal smarter and more formidible than other Warrior-types. The reason being that attacking her requires cluing people in to what she is doing.

I would not call her a Jerk for the same reason I wouldn't call an Evil Clown one. The methods are completely different. Evil Clown delights in torturing people by disguising insults as jokes. When backed into a corner blames his victims for lacking a sense of humor. Does anyone really debate that the victims couldn't handle a little joke, and the Evil Clown deserves an apology? The same goes for The Truth. She presents insults disguised as honest insights. When backed into a corner she blames her victims for not being able to handle honesty.

Now that I think on it, The Truth is kind of like a fraternal twin sister to the Evil Clown. Cruely insulting people in a way they can blame the victim for getting upset over.
_________________

Tireless Rebutter / Archivist
The Grand Suggestion List

All right... under duress, I've rewritten and renames The Truth. I feel the lack of subtlety fails to accentuate the nature of the Warrior I am describing. However, atleast people will stop getting the wrong idea from skimming and can't jump to conclusions based on the name.

The new version is called Sinister Oracle.
_________________

Tireless Rebutter / Archivist
The Grand Suggestion List

OK, just for argument's sake (AKA I'm a female) why is The Truth only a she? Just wondering.
_________________
The Average Woman Would Rather Have Beauty Than Brains Because The Average Man Can See Better Than He Can Think

Dark Lord of the Stealth Joined: 27 Dec 2004 Posts: 361

Well, Sinister Oracle is much better. The Truth is a lost cause, it would be a real tragedy if it got included in the Warriors. The more I think about it the more I dislike the idea altogether. It's more of a tactic than a warrior type, and I think it is already sufficiently covered by Evil Clown and Jerk.

But then again, maybe you're right. Maybe everyone else here is an idiot incapbable of comprehending your words. You hold The Truth in your hands, all others will eventually see that. Eventually, maybe we will bow down and worship you.

Or maybe not...

--Alistair

Too many things I want to say, but have not enought time right now. Besides there are a couple of things I see I need to put into perspective.

First, see this from the point of view you described Evil Clown (lets pretend you did), however you choose to suggest the label "Clown". Everyone reacts by thinking a "clown"would be someone who likes fooling around, and many do that, so it hardly deserves any special recognisition.

In fact, some actually do clown around to brighten things up on a forum, but they don't attack anyone or their ideals.

You are faced with the same dilemma.

I'm not suggesting you change the description (I like it), but I see your suggestion as Evil Truth, but Sinister Oracle is good. What I did before was expand on what you suggested. I see that you really sugested Evil Truth, so I outlined the other subtypes. Actually I should have used "General Truth" (rather than just "Truth") for the newish member

So from this point on, when I refer to the Truth, it is the Label that embodies all subtypes, including Evil Truth which you have aptly described.

How could I put Pinnacle into the newer suggested version of the much larger group of Truth? Well I mistook your first description of Pinnacle for HDTruth.

To quote you - " Pinnacles will attack people just to see what they can get away with, they're typically peace-mongerers and can't stand engaged fighting." From my experience that is why they will package anything confrontational, dressed/wrapped up as a benign truth.

Would you have been better off using the label "Evil Truth" or "Wicked Truth" rather than "Truth". I think so. It wold have been interesting to have included that option in your poll. Sinister Oracle should win most of the votes, as there is no real choice for a suitable label. You will note, no labels on the Roster are ironic to that extent.

next: truth as a tatic, and Truth as a warrior.

Yes, truths are used every day in arguements. Big Dog and other hostile warriors types, use them to great effect. There would be very few warriors who wouldn't use the truth as they see it - in other words their opinion. Its part of every message we send off. Any warrior, can be frank with the truth, but it is simply overlooked as being part of their persona, and because of that, what they say is overlooked as just something they'd say to win the arguement, or press a point.

Now compare that with people, who break from their baseline chatter, and have decided they really need to confront someone directly with "harsh reality". The confrontation is generally a personal attack (ad hominem), but not always. We've all seen this? I'd assume - yes. More often than not, it's a frank, concise summing up, that is generally seen as a personal attack on someone/something.

So I see "The Truth" as a warrior who specialises in confronting members and groups with the "truth" of the matter. They like to operate from a safe position, (much like a snipper), which is behind the relative saftey of what they have perceived/concocted to be truth. Often they attack midstream in a thread, and it's seldom on-topic. What matters, may only be an aspect of the overall arguement, or none at all. (Well, none that are clear). So in some respects, they operate a bit like Issues (but they could never fit in the Issues catagory, as their pet issues are usually chained up somewhere safe and secure)

Next - are they a warrior? Going over the examples, doesn't sound like thery are trying to become friends soon. Are they a separate warrior type? My opinion is yes. The different types of "Truth" may have aspects of other warriors, but what warrior wouldn't. I still have a number of members I use pigeon-holed descriptions for, as no real warrior type exists yet. (Actually I still use many, even though there is the same on the roster. But the roster makes it posible to politely point out to someone what they are)
_________________
The important thing is knowing who owns the fence

Ah! Yes, I see what you're getting out now. It hadn't occurred to me that using the name "Truth" for a liar might make it harder to add other warriors who generally do use the truth. Your feedback was the main reason I renamed The Truth in the first place. The new name also fits in better with Evil Clown, so it worked out in my opinion.

As for Pinnacles, well... it's kind of hard to explain their behavior. They want to be at the top of the heap and they're typically benign as long as you don't appear to oppose them. Despite this and the fact they're lousy at defending themselves, they'll randomly insult people. Then, the moment it is clear they pissed off someone who's not going to let it go, they fly the white flag.
_________________

Tireless Rebutter / Archivist
The Grand Suggestion List

Pinnacles that I've encountered, generally are those I'd call a smiling snake in the grass. (I use pet names originating from several Australian snake species and what they do, depending of how poisonous members seem.) HD Truths are similar, however they wave a different white flag, but they never usually get the chance.

Sinister Oracle (Evil Truth) Sometimes I think they do what they do, to move someone/group out into the open. Psychologically taunting another member would be common, but I wonder how many times it was meant to seed some thinking/research in the related area.

Hmmm tired, maybe I'm reading in too much now, but it's the most thought I've ever given, to this type of warrior until now. If I was going to dispute Sinister Oracle thoroughly, I would have researched. Perhaps the plan is, though one idea is bogus, you find other nasties along the way. Perhaps not all are just about a simple hurt game.
_________________
The important thing is knowing who owns the fence

I've taken the approach of trying to just focus on the core aspect of Flame Warriors I'm describing. Since people are different, you can't get any role perfect for every person. I think most people are either close to the Warrior they associate themselves with, or a combination. A friend of mine is a Rebel Leader on some forums and Godfather on others.
_________________

Tireless Rebutter / Archivist
The Grand Suggestion List