Phraust said:
Rather than looking at the substance of anyone's arguments, I'll take a blanket look at the perception of how people are recognized, not to mention being obsurdly late on it. By looking at the popular misconceptions of some of the most highly recognized personalities of the board, I'll raise quite a popularity of myself by utilizing the same tools that the people I'm attacking use, thereby giving the perception to the general populace of accuracy; all while furthering the rut rather than giving any real substance for change.
Close?
I saw it as more of a tongue-in-cheek look at the stereotypes themselves. And while yes, all the aforementioned posters are individuals, they generally *are* known for posting in such a manner. It's doesn't seem to me to be anything more serious than a joke. What's the best food for thought is how accurate it may or may not be.
For anyone who can read their section and go "wtf, that's *so* not me, what about this post and this and this and all these topics here?", well, you've got nothing to worry about. You're not your stereotype, or your stereotype is inaccurate. (Personally, in that case, I'd offer my own more accurate "quote" for the collection.) Either that or you've got really (bad) selective memory and/or no capability for criticizing or laughing at yourself.
For anyone who can read their section and go "... yep, that's pretty spot-on for what I say", guess what, the stereotype's accurate. Whether you wanna get upset, change your posting habits, or react in any other way is up to you. Never mind that I dunno who Aronson is.
I don't think it really "furthers the rut". In some ways it kinda serves as a wake-up call to people to see how others perceive them (if, of course, they didn't already know that). It's up to the individuals to decide if they want to stay in the rut or not.
I'll grant the "absurdly late" bit though!